Search

We analyze a principal-agent model with moral hazard where the principal is risk neutral while the agent is risk averse or risk neutral. The agent is free to choose any probability distribution over outcomes, where some distributions require more effort than others. The agent's effort-cost function is of "Legendre type" and satisfies an axiom of invariance under mergers of outcomes that are equally paid by the principal. We analyze a family of such effort-cost functions. For a canonical subclass of these, and arbitrary outcome spaces, the principal's contract problem allows for closed-form solutions. Optimal contracts then combine debt with a monotonic sharing rule for the surplus above a threshold chosen by the principal. When the agent is risk neutral, the contract boils down to a pure debt contract. For agents with unit degree of relative risk aversion, the surplus is divided in fixed shares., QC 20230425

CRUE-CSIC (Acuerdos Transformativos 2022), The principal–agent problem occurs when one entity (the ‘‘agent’’), is able to make decisions and/or take actions on behalf of another person or entity (the ‘‘principal’’). The agent earnings are regulated under a contract designed by the principal. Under the principal’s point of view, the main goal while designing said contract (and the payment rules incorporated on it) is to align the actions made by the agent to the principal’s own goals. So, in this paper we will define a method that will allow the principal to forecast the remuneration obtained by the agent under an established contract in the insurance sector., Depto. de Economía Financiera y Actuarial y Estadística, Depto. de Ingeniería de Software e Inteligencia Artificial (ISIA), Fac. de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Fac. de Informática, TRUE, pub

We analyze a principal-supervisor-two-agent hierarchy with inefficient supervision. The supervisor may collect an incorrect signal on the agents' effort levels. When reporting to the principal, the supervisor may collude with one or both agents to manipulate the signal in exchange for a bribe. In the hierarchy, we identify a new trade-off between inefficient supervision and supervisor-agent collusion: Due to the incorrect supervisory signal, truthfully reporting the supervisory signal under collusion proofness may mistakenly punish the agents. As a result, allowing a certain type of collusion helps correct the incorrect signal and provides a higher incentive for the agents to work. We characterize the optimal no-supervision, collusion-proof, and collusive-supervision contracts, and show that the collusive-supervision contract dominates the others when supervisory efficiency is at an intermediate level.

We analyze a principal-supervisor-two-agent hierarchy with inefficient supervision. The supervisor may collect an incorrect signal on the agents' effort levels. When reporting to the principal, the supervisor may collude with one or both agents to manipulate the signal in exchange for a bribe. In the hierarchy, we identify a new trade-off between inefficient supervision and supervisor-agent collusion: Due to the incorrect supervisory signal, truthfully reporting the supervisory signal under collusion proofness may mistakenly punish the agents. As a result, allowing a certain type of collusion helps correct the incorrect signal and provides a higher incentive for the agents to work. We characterize the optimal no-supervision, collusion-proof, and collusive-supervision contracts, and show that the collusive-supervision contract dominates the others when supervisory efficiency is at an intermediate level.

The architecture, engineering and construction industry faces challenges when dealing withprocurement contract design and risk-handling. The optimal contracting practices have beenworldwide studied in areas of contract theory which studies how the optimal incentivemechanism (“contracts”) can be designed to encourage the parties to behave more efficiently.The parties usually consist of a principal and an agent, where the principal hires an agent todeliver goods or services. However, the complexity of contract theory calls for a morepracticable approach in an attempt to understand the procurement problem in the industry andincrease knowledge-sharing between projects. The purpose of this study is to propose a model based on contract theory that can be used inpractice to investigate the effects of project endogenous risks in three different types ofprocurement contracts: fixed-price, time and material, and incentive. Thus, this study usesquantitative methods with the aim to explain the current procurement problem in the Swedisharchitecture, engineering, and construction industry, compare theory and practice, andcontribute to knowledge about the linkage between endogenous risks, optimal risk sharing andcontract design. The conclusions from this study are that the current contracting practices in the industry arenot aligned with the optimal contract design described by the theory. The theory in this researchshowed that, given endogenous project risks, the optimal incentives vary in the agent’saversion to risk resulting in a non-monotone relationship between optimal contract power andproject risk. Further, a contract becomes optimal and efficient when cost savings and qualityincentives are aligned. However, the analysis of real-world projects presented no clearrelationship between contract power and project risk, i.e. some projects with fixed-pricecontracts or time and material contracts presented the same risk level. Hence, this researchproposes a method for computing the, Byggbranschen står inför utmaningar när det gäller kontraktsdesign och riskhantering. Deoptimala upphandlingsmetoderna har studerats över hela världen inom områden avkontraktsteori som i sin tur studerar hur den optimala incitamentsmekanismen ("kontrakt") kanutformas för att uppmuntra parterna att agera mer effektivt. Parterna består vanligtvis av enprincipal och en agent, där principalen anställer en agent för att leverera varor eller tjänster.Men komplexiteten i kontraktsteori kräver ett mer praktiskt tillvägagångssätt i ett försök attbättre förstå upphandlingsproblemet i byggbranschen samt att öka kunskapsutbytet mellanprojekt. Syftet med denna studie är att föreslå en modell baserad på kontraktsteori som kan användas ipraktiken för att undersöka effekter av endogena risker i tre olika typer avupphandlingskontrakt: fastpris, rörligt pris (time and material) och incitament. Denna studieanvänder därmed kvantitativa metoder i syfte att förklara det aktuella upphandlingsproblemeti den svenska byggbranschen, jämföra teori och praktik, och bidra till utökad kunskap omsambandet mellan endogena risker, optimal riskdelning och kontraktsdesign. Slutsatsen från denna studie är att den nuvarande upphandlingspraxisen i branschen inte är ilinje med den optimala kontraktsdesignen som beskrivs av teorin. Teorin i denna studie visaratt, förutsatt endogena projektrisker, så varierar de optimala incitamenten med agentensriskaversion vilket resulterar i ett icke-monoton förhållande mellan optimal kontraktsdesignoch projektrisk. Dessutom blir ett kontrakt optimalt och effektivt när kostnadsbesparingar ochkvalitetsincitament är i linje med varandra. Men analysen av verkliga projekt visar inget tydligtsamband mellan kontraktsdesign och projektrisk, det vill säga en del projekt med fastpris ellerrörligt pris visade sig ha samma risknivå. Därför föreslår denna studie en metod för beräkningav det optimala incitamentet som kan användas i många fall där de andra två typerna avkontrakt för n

The architecture, engineering and construction industry faces challenges when dealing withprocurement contract design and risk-handling. The optimal contracting practices have beenworldwide studied in areas of contract theory which studies how the optimal incentivemechanism (“contracts”) can be designed to encourage the parties to behave more efficiently.The parties usually consist of a principal and an agent, where the principal hires an agent todeliver goods or services. However, the complexity of contract theory calls for a morepracticable approach in an attempt to understand the procurement problem in the industry andincrease knowledge-sharing between projects. The purpose of this study is to propose a model based on contract theory that can be used inpractice to investigate the effects of project endogenous risks in three different types ofprocurement contracts: fixed-price, time and material, and incentive. Thus, this study usesquantitative methods with the aim to explain the current procurement problem in the Swedisharchitecture, engineering, and construction industry, compare theory and practice, andcontribute to knowledge about the linkage between endogenous risks, optimal risk sharing andcontract design. The conclusions from this study are that the current contracting practices in the industry arenot aligned with the optimal contract design described by the theory. The theory in this researchshowed that, given endogenous project risks, the optimal incentives vary in the agent’saversion to risk resulting in a non-monotone relationship between optimal contract power andproject risk. Further, a contract becomes optimal and efficient when cost savings and qualityincentives are aligned. However, the analysis of real-world projects presented no clearrelationship between contract power and project risk, i.e. some projects with fixed-pricecontracts or time and material contracts presented the same risk level. Hence, this researchproposes a method for computing the, Byggbranschen står inför utmaningar när det gäller kontraktsdesign och riskhantering. Deoptimala upphandlingsmetoderna har studerats över hela världen inom områden avkontraktsteori som i sin tur studerar hur den optimala incitamentsmekanismen ("kontrakt") kanutformas för att uppmuntra parterna att agera mer effektivt. Parterna består vanligtvis av enprincipal och en agent, där principalen anställer en agent för att leverera varor eller tjänster.Men komplexiteten i kontraktsteori kräver ett mer praktiskt tillvägagångssätt i ett försök attbättre förstå upphandlingsproblemet i byggbranschen samt att öka kunskapsutbytet mellanprojekt. Syftet med denna studie är att föreslå en modell baserad på kontraktsteori som kan användas ipraktiken för att undersöka effekter av endogena risker i tre olika typer avupphandlingskontrakt: fastpris, rörligt pris (time and material) och incitament. Denna studieanvänder därmed kvantitativa metoder i syfte att förklara det aktuella upphandlingsproblemeti den svenska byggbranschen, jämföra teori och praktik, och bidra till utökad kunskap omsambandet mellan endogena risker, optimal riskdelning och kontraktsdesign. Slutsatsen från denna studie är att den nuvarande upphandlingspraxisen i branschen inte är ilinje med den optimala kontraktsdesignen som beskrivs av teorin. Teorin i denna studie visaratt, förutsatt endogena projektrisker, så varierar de optimala incitamenten med agentensriskaversion vilket resulterar i ett icke-monoton förhållande mellan optimal kontraktsdesignoch projektrisk. Dessutom blir ett kontrakt optimalt och effektivt när kostnadsbesparingar ochkvalitetsincitament är i linje med varandra. Men analysen av verkliga projekt visar inget tydligtsamband mellan kontraktsdesign och projektrisk, det vill säga en del projekt med fastpris ellerrörligt pris visade sig ha samma risknivå. Därför föreslår denna studie en metod för beräkningav det optimala incitamentet som kan användas i många fall där de andra två typerna avkontrakt för n

We analyze a principal-supervisor-two-agent hierarchy with inefficient supervision. The supervisor may collect an incorrect signal on the agents' effort levels. When reporting to the principal, the supervisor may collude with one or both agents to manipulate the signal in exchange for a bribe. In the hierarchy, we identify a new trade-off between inefficient supervision and supervisor-agent collusion: Due to the incorrect supervisory signal, truthfully reporting the supervisory signal under collusion proofness may mistakenly punish the agents. As a result, allowing a certain type of collusion helps correct the incorrect signal and provides a higher incentive for the agents to work. We characterize the optimal no-supervision, collusion-proof, and collusive-supervision contracts, and show that the collusive-supervision contract dominates the others when supervisory efficiency is at an intermediate level.

We examine the optimality of budget policies imposed by a funding authority on a bureaucrat who operates under a fixed budget. In particular, we study a “use-it-or-lose-it” (UILI) policy under which the bureaucrat has to return any unspent budget without being able to “roll over” any part to the next period. Instead of returning the unspent budget, the bureaucrat can go on a spending spree and engage in policy drift, which is inversely related to his motivation. The bureaucrat's motivation represents how well matched he is with the bureaucracy's mission. We show that a UILI policy is complementary to motivation as it has stronger ex ante positive incentive effects on more motivated bureaucrats. Such ex ante positive effects can overcome the ex post inefficiency of the policy and make a UILI policy optimal when the bureaucrat is well matched with the bureaucracy's mission or when its budget is large., SCOPUS: ar.j, DecretOANoAutActif, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

The separation of ownership and control within companies cause agency problems. Executive compensation is a tool to align the interests between shareholders and top executives. This thesis studies the potential effects of executive compensation packages on the firm value and other factors. I have three main findings in this thesis. In the first paper, I show that when CEOs are probability weighting, the optimal contracts are convex. This explains the existence of option components in CEO's compensation packages. In the second paper, I find that the wage of the employee is increasing in the CEO pay. This relationship is found both across firms and across time. I ascribe this relationship to the behindness aversion of workers. The result suggests CEO compensation incurs extra costs to the firms. In the third paper, I show that firms with low wage gaps between CEO and workers are overpriced on the stock market. The effect should be even stronger in the presence of inequalityaverse investors. This finding suggests that investors do trade on the pay inequality, and show that the mis-pricing comes from the overvaluation of low wage gap stocks.

We model the optimal regulation of continuous, irreversible, capacity expansion, in a model in which the regulated network firm has private information about its capacity costs, investments need to be financed out of the firm's cash flows from selling network access and demand is stochastic. If asymmetric information is large, the optimal mechanism consists of a regulatory holiday for low-cost firms, and a mark-up regime for higher-cost firms. With the regulatory holiday, a firm receives the full revenue of capacity sales, and expands capacity as if it were an unregulated monopolist. Under the mark-up regime, a firm receives only a fraction of the capacity revenues, and is obliged to expand capacity whenever the price for capacity reaches a threshold. The regulatory holiday is necessary to fund information rents to the most efficient firms, which invest relatively early, as direct investment subsidies are not feasible.

We present a general equilibrium model of a moral-hazard economy with many firms and financial markets, where stocks and bonds are traded. Contrary to the principal-agent literature, we argue that optimal contracting in an infinite economy is not about a tradeoff between risk sharing and incentives, but it is all about incentives. Even when the economy is finite, optimal contracts do not depend on principals' risk aversion, but on market prices of risks. We also show that optimal contracting does not require relative performance evaluation, that the second best risk-free interest rate is lower than that of the first best, and that the second-best equity premium can be higher or lower than that of the first best. Moral hazard can contribute to the resolution of the risk-free rate puzzle. Its potential to explain the equity premium puzzle is examined. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

We present a general equilibrium model of a moral-hazard economy with many firms and financial markets, where stocks and bonds are traded. Contrary to the principal-agent literature, we argue that optimal contracting in an infinite economy is not about a tradeoff between risk sharing and incentives, but it is all about incentives. Even when the economy is finite, optimal contracts do not depend on principals' risk aversion, but on market prices of risks. We also show that optimal contracting does not require relative performance evaluation, that the second best risk-free interest rate is lower than that of the first best, and that the second-best equity premium can be higher or lower than that of the first best. Moral hazard can contribute to the resolution of the risk-free rate puzzle. Its potential to explain the equity premium puzzle is examined. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

We present a general equilibrium model of a moral-hazard economy with many firms and financial markets, where stocks and bonds are traded. Contrary to the principal-agent literature, we argue that optimal contracting in an infinite economy is not about a tradeoff between risk sharing and incentives, but it is all about incentives. Even when the economy is finite, optimal contracts do not depend on principals' risk aversion, but on market prices of risks. We also show that optimal contracting does not require relative performance evaluation, that the second best risk-free interest rate is lower than that of the first best, and that the second-best equity premium can be higher or lower than that of the first best. Moral hazard can contribute to the resolution of the risk-free rate puzzle. Its potential to explain the equity premium puzzle is examined. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

This project was a step forward in developing a 'descriptive theory' of contracting in the oil and gas industry that reflects the operating environment in which the project manager operates. This study investigates the existing processes and methods used in establishing contracts which are very often prescriptive, and not always appropriate or optimal for a given situation. This study contributes to contracting effectiveness or optimal contracting in the oil and gas industry.

We solve a long-term contracting problem with symmetric uncertainty about the agent’s quality and a hidden action of the agent. As information about quality accumulates, incentives become easier to provide because the agent has less room to manipulate the principal’s beliefs. This result is opposite to that in the literature on “career concerns” in which incentives via short-term contracts become harder to provide as the agent’s quality is revealed over time

It is standard in agency theory to search for incentive-compatible mechanisms on the assumption that people care only about their own material wealth. Yet it may be useful to consider social forces in mechanism design and contract theory. We devise an experiment to explore optimal contracts in a hidden information context. A principal offers one of three possible contract menus to a team of two agents of unknown types. We observe numerous rejections of the more lopsided menus, and approach an equilibrium where one of the more equitable menus is proposed and agents accept a contract, selecting actions according to their types. The consensus menu differs across treatments that vary the payoffs resulting from a rejection. We find that an agent is more likely to reject a contract menu if her teammate rejected a contract menu in the previous period, suggesting that agents may be learning social norms; in addition, low-ability agents have a particularly adverse reaction to reduced wage offers.

It is standard in agency theory to search for incentive-compatible mechanisms on the assumption that people care only about their own material wealth. Yet it may be useful to consider social preferences in mechanism design and contract theory. We devise an experiment to explore optimal contracts in an adverse-selection context. A principal offers one of three possible contract menus to a team of two agents of unknown types. We observe numerous rejections of the more lopsided menus, and approach an equilibrium where one of the more equitable menus (which one depends on the reservation payoffs) is proposed and agents accept a contract, selecting actions according to their types. We estimate the Fehr and Schmidt (1999) and Charness and Rabin (2002) models of social preferences with our data, and calculate ex post optimal social-preference contracts. In both cases, the principal could substantially enhance his profitability if he could offer the derived optimal contract menu. We also find evidence that an agent is substantially more likely to reject a contract menu if her teammate rejected a contract menu in the previous period, suggesting that agents may be learning social norms.

It is standard in agency theory to search for incentive-compatible mechanisms on the assumption that people care only about their own material wealth. Yet it may be useful to consider social forces in mechanism design and contract theory. We devise an experiment to explore optimal contracts in a hidden information context. A principal offers one of three possible contract menus to a team of two agents of unknown types. We observe numerous rejections of the more lopsided menus, and approach an equilibrium where one of the more equitable menus is proposed and agents accept a contract, selecting actions according to their types. The consensus menu differs across treatments that vary the payoffs resulting from a rejection. We find that an agent is more likely to reject a contract menu if her teammate rejected a contract menu in the previous period, suggesting that agents may be learning social norms; in addition, low-ability agents have a particularly adverse reaction to reduced wage offers.

It is standard in agency theory to search for incentive-compatible mechanisms on the assumption that people care only about their own material wealth. Yet it may be useful to consider social preferences in mechanism design and contract theory. We devise an experiment to explore optimal contracts in an adverse-selection context. A principal offers one of three possible contract menus to a team of two agents of unknown types. We observe numerous rejections of the more lopsided menus, and approach an equilibrium where one of the more equitable menus (which one depends on the reservation payoffs) is proposed and agents accept a contract, selecting actions according to their types. We estimate the Fehr and Schmidt (1999) and Charness and Rabin (2002) models of social preferences with our data, and calculate ex post optimal social-preference contracts. In both cases, the principal could substantially enhance his profitability if he could offer the derived optimal contract menu. We also find evidence that an agent is substantially more likely to reject a contract menu if her teammate rejected a contract menu in the previous period, suggesting that agents may be learning social norms.

In a typical corporate hierarchy, the manager is delegated the authority to make decisions that set directions for the organization, employ subordinates and contract with external suppliers. This paper explains when such delegation of authority can be optimal, using a model of a firm with three parties: the principal, the manager and the worker. In centralization with two two-tier hierarchies, the principal designs contracts for both agents. In delegation with a three-tier hierarchy, the principal directly contracts with a delegated agent who, in turn, contracts with the other agent. We identify an environment where the principal can benefit from delegating authority to the manager, but not to the worker. Beneficial delegation arises endogenously when delegation motivates the manager to acquire valuable information, which is used for better decision-making and more efficient incentive provision to the worker. We also show how total surplus is distributed in delegation vis-à-vis centralization, document comparative statics results regarding the benefits of delegation and the distribution of total surplus, and discuss when delegation is more likely to dominate centralization.

Bibliography: p. 29-32, This paper studies optimal managerial contracts in two contracting environments. When contracts can be based on earnings, an optimal contract is interpreted as a combination of base salary, golden parachute and bonus. When earnings are not verifiable, two types of optimal contracts are derived: a contract with restricted stock ownership, and a contract with stock options. These three types of optimal contracts are payoff-equivalent in a strong sense: agents' ex ante and ex post payoffs are the same under all three contracts, implying that the choice of contractual form is irrelevant in the environment studied in this paper. This paper thus suggests directions of research for the relevance of different contractual forms.

Bibliography: p. 21-22, Leverage, Volatility and Executive Stock Options Abstract This paper studies how an optimal wage contract can be implemented using stock options, and derives the properties of the optimal contract with stock options. Specifically, we show how the exercise price and the size of the option grant should change in respose to changes in exogenous parameter. First, for a fixed exercise price of executive stock options, the size of the option grant decreases in the riskiness of a desired investment policy, decreases in the volatility of return from the risky project, and increases in leverage. Second, for a fixed size of the option grant, the optimal exercise price of managerial stock options increases in the riskiness of a desired investment policy, increases in the volatility of return from the risky project, and decreases in leverage. Several empirical predictions are drawn from these conclusions regarding the pay-performance sensitivity of management compensation.