IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v69y2023i5p2852-2869.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three Years, Two Papers, One Course Off: Optimal Nonmonetary Reward Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Shivam Gupta

    (College of Business, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588)

  • Wei Chen

    (School of Business, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045)

  • Milind Dawande

    (Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080)

  • Ganesh Janakiraman

    (Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080)

Abstract

We consider a principal who periodically offers a fixed and costly nonmonetary reward to agents to incentivize them to invest effort over the long run. An agent’s output, as a function of his effort, is a priori uncertain and is worth a fixed per-unit value to the principal. The principal’s goal is to design an attractive reward policy that specifies how the rewards are to be given to an agent over time based on that agent’s past performance. This problem, which we denote by P , is motivated by practical examples from both academia (e.g., a reduced teaching load) and industry (e.g., “Supplier of the Year” awards). The following “limited-term” (LT) reward policy structure has been quite popular in practice. The principal evaluates each agent periodically; if an agent’s performance over a certain (limited) number of periods in the immediate past exceeds a predefined threshold, then the principal rewards him for a certain (limited) number of periods in the immediate future. When agents’ outputs are deterministic in their efforts, we show that there always exists an optimal policy that is an LT policy and also, obtain such a policy. When agents’ outputs are stochastic, we show that the class of LT policies may not contain any optimal policy of problem P but is guaranteed to contain policies that are arbitrarily near optimal. Given any ϵ > 0 , we show how to obtain an LT policy whose performance is within ϵ of that of an optimal policy. This guarantee depends crucially on the use of sufficiently long histories of the agents’ outputs. We also analyze LT policies with short histories and derive structural insights on the role played by (i) the length of the available history and (ii) the variability in the random variable governing an agent’s output. We show that the average performance of these policies is within 5% of the optimum, justifying their popularity in practice. We then introduce and analyze the class of “score-based” reward policies; we show that this class is guaranteed to contain an optimal policy and also, obtain such a policy. Finally, we analyze a generalization in which the principal has a limited number for rewards in any given period and show that the class of score-based policies, with modifications to accommodate the limited availability of the rewards, continues to contain an optimal solution for the principal.

Suggested Citation

  • Shivam Gupta & Wei Chen & Milind Dawande & Ganesh Janakiraman, 2023. "Three Years, Two Papers, One Course Off: Optimal Nonmonetary Reward Policies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2852-2869, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:5:p:2852-2869
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4482
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4482
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4482?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Radner, Roy, 1985. "Repeated Principal-Agent Games with Discounting," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(5), pages 1173-1198, September.
    2. Eriksson, Tor & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2012. "Respect and relational contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 286-298.
    3. Bruno Biais & Thomas Mariotti & Jean-Charles Rochet & StÈphane Villeneuve, 2010. "Large Risks, Limited Liability, and Dynamic Moral Hazard," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 73-118, January.
    4. Canice Prendergast, 2022. "The Allocation of Food to Food Banks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(8), pages 1993-2017.
    5. Mark Bagnoli & Ted Bergstrom, 2006. "Log-concave probability and its applications," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Rosa L. Matzkin & Daniel L. McFadden & James C. Moore & Nicholas C. Yann (ed.), Rationality and Equilibrium, pages 217-241, Springer.
    6. David Lingenbrink & Krishnamurthy Iyer, 2019. "Optimal Signaling Mechanisms in Unobservable Queues," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 1397-1416, September.
    7. Saed Alizamir & Francis de Véricourt & Shouqiang Wang, 2020. "Warning Against Recurring Risks: An Information Design Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4612-4629, October.
    8. Michael Kosfeld & Susanne Neckermann, 2011. "Getting More Work for Nothing? Symbolic Awards and Worker Performance," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 86-99, August.
    9. Guo, Yingni & Hörner, Johannes, 2015. "Dynamic Mechanisms without Money," Economics Series 310, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    10. Sebastian Kube & Michel Andre Marechal & Clemens Puppe, 2012. "The Currency of Reciprocity: Gift Exchange in the Workplace," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1644-1662, June.
    11. Santiago R. Balseiro & Huseyin Gurkan & Peng Sun, 2019. "Multiagent Mechanism Design Without Money," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 1417-1436, September.
    12. Hongmin Li & Hao Zhang & Charles H. Fine, 2013. "Dynamic Business Share Allocation in a Supply Chain with Competing Suppliers," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 280-297, April.
    13. Erica L. Plambeck & Terry A. Taylor, 2006. "Partnership in a Dynamic Production System with Unobservable Actions and Noncontractible Output," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(10), pages 1509-1527, October.
    14. Maskin, Eric, 2011. "Commentary: Nash equilibrium and mechanism design," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 9-11, January.
    15. Kris Johnson & David Simchi-Levi & Peng Sun, 2014. "Analyzing Scrip Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 524-534, June.
    16. Santiago R. Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2015. "Repeated Auctions with Budgets in Ad Exchanges: Approximations and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 864-884, April.
    17. Yiangos Papanastasiou & Kostas Bimpikis & Nicos Savva, 2018. "Crowdsourcing Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1727-1746, April.
    18. Hamid Nazerzadeh & Amin Saberi & Rakesh Vohra, 2013. "Dynamic Pay-Per-Action Mechanisms and Applications to Online Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 98-111, February.
    19. Schummer, James, 2004. "Almost-dominant strategy implementation: exchange economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 154-170, July.
    20. Eric Budish & Gérard P. Cachon & Judd B. Kessler & Abraham Othman, 2017. "Course Match: A Large-Scale Implementation of Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes for Combinatorial Allocation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 314-336, April.
    21. Z. Justin Ren & Morris A. Cohen & Teck H. Ho & Christian Terwiesch, 2010. "Information Sharing in a Long-Term Supply Chain Relationship: The Role of Customer Review Strategy," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 81-93, February.
    22. Yuliy Sannikov, 2008. "A Continuous-Time Version of the Principal-Agent Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(3), pages 957-984.
    23. Yash Kanoria & Hamid Nazerzadeh, 2021. "Incentive-Compatible Learning of Reserve Prices for Repeated Auctions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 509-524, March.
    24. Kostas Bimpikis & Shayan Ehsani & Mohamed Mostagir, 2019. "Designing Dynamic Contests," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 339-356, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Mariotti & Nikolaus Schweizer & Nora Szech & Jonas von Wangenheim, 2023. "Information Nudges and Self-Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2182-2197, April.
    2. Jerry Anunrojwong & Krishnamurthy Iyer & David Lingenbrink, 2024. "Persuading Risk-Conscious Agents: A Geometric Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 151-166, January.
    3. Jerry Anunrojwong & Krishnamurthy Iyer & Vahideh Manshadi, 2023. "Information Design for Congested Social Services: Optimal Need-Based Persuasion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3778-3796, July.
    4. Damien Berriaud & Ezzat Elokda & Devansh Jalota & Emilio Frazzoli & Marco Pavone & Florian Dorfler, 2024. "To Spend or to Gain: Online Learning in Repeated Karma Auctions," Papers 2403.04057, arXiv.org.
    5. Shouqiang Wang & Peng Sun & Francis de Véricourt, 2016. "Inducing Environmental Disclosures: A Dynamic Mechanism Design Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 371-389, April.
    6. Francis de Véricourt, & Huseyin Gurkan, & Shouqiang Wang,, 2020. "Informing the public about a pandemic," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-20-03, ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 11 Feb 2021.
    7. Jacquillat, Alexandre & Vaze, Vikrant & Wang, Weilong, 2022. "Primary versus secondary infrastructure capacity allocation mechanisms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 668-687.
    8. Chang-Koo Chi & Kyoung Jin Choi, 2017. "The impact of firm size on dynamic incentives and investment," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(1), pages 147-177, March.
    9. Liang, Yong & Sun, Peng & Tang, Runyu & Zhang, Chong, 2023. "Efficient resource allocation contracts to reduce adverse events," Other publications TiSEM 0bcf44d9-d0ac-4231-beaf-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Kvaløy, Ola & Nieken, Petra & Schöttner, Anja, 2015. "Hidden benefits of reward: A field experiment on motivation and monetary incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 188-199.
    11. Hongmin Li & Hao Zhang & Charles H. Fine, 2013. "Dynamic Business Share Allocation in a Supply Chain with Competing Suppliers," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 280-297, April.
    12. Arve, Malin & Zwart, Gijsbert, 2023. "Optimal procurement and investment in new technologies under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    13. Thibaut Mastrolia & Dylan Possamaï, 2018. "Moral Hazard Under Ambiguity," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 179(2), pages 452-500, November.
    14. Christiane Bradler & Susanne Neckermann, 2019. "The Magic of the Personal Touch: Field Experimental Evidence on Money and Appreciation as Gifts," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 1189-1221, July.
    15. Lambsdorff, Johann Graf & Grubiak, Kevin & Werner, Katharina, 2023. "Intrinsic Motivation vs. Corruption? Experimental Evidence on the Performance of Officials," MPRA Paper 118153, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Julien Combe & Vladyslav Nora & Olivier Tercieux, 2021. "Dynamic assignment without money: Optimality of spot mechanisms," Working Papers 2021-11, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    17. Sliwka, Dirk & Werner, Peter, 2016. "How Do Agents React to Dynamic Wage Increases? An Experimental Study," IZA Discussion Papers 9855, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Pagès, Henri, 2013. "Bank monitoring incentives and optimal ABS," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 30-54.
    19. Martin Szydlowski, 2012. "Ambiguity in Dynamic Contracts," Discussion Papers 1543, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    20. Liu, Bo & Mu, Congming & Yang, Jinqiang, 2017. "Dynamic agency and investment theory with time-inconsistent preferences," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 88-95.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:5:p:2852-2869. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.