IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jemstr/v27y2018i1p82-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The O‐ring theory of the firm

Author

Listed:
  • Michael T. Rauh

Abstract

We develop an O‐ring production function characterized by specialization and division of labor and where shirking or negative shocks can have major adverse consequences. We show that when the principal can monitor individual output, the firm tends be large (potentially larger than first best), with a high degree of specialization and division of labor, weak incentives, and low pay as in traditional nonunion manufacturing. Moral hazard can only limit the size of the firm relative to the first best when the principal can only monitor team output, in which case the firm has the opposite characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael T. Rauh, 2018. "The O‐ring theory of the firm," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 82-101, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jemstr:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:82-101
    DOI: 10.1111/jems.12216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12216
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jems.12216?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. Patrick Bolton & Mathias Dewatripont, 2005. "Contract Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262025760, April.
    2. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Ziv, Amir, 1993. "Performance Measures and Optimal Organization," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 30-50, April.
    4. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    5. Michael T. Rauh, 2014. "Incentives, wages, employment, and the division of labor in teams," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(3), pages 533-552, September.
    6. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Friebel, Guido & Pechlivanos, Lambros, 1999. "Teamwork Management in an Era of Diminishing Commitment," CEPR Discussion Papers 2281, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Michael T. Rauh, 2020. "The Neoclassical Firm Under Moral Hazard," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 191-225, June.
    2. Michael T. Rauh, 2014. "Incentives, wages, employment, and the division of labor in teams," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(3), pages 533-552, September.
    3. Giat, Yahel & Subramanian, Ajay, 2013. "Dynamic contracting under imperfect public information and asymmetric beliefs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 2833-2861.
    4. Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2018. "Moral hazard: Base models and two extensions," Chapters, in: Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume I, chapter 16, pages 453-485, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Ramalingam, Abhijit, 2009. ""Endogenous" Relative Concerns: The Impact of Workers' Characteristics on Status and Pro ts in the Firm," MPRA Paper 18759, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Sumitro Banerjee & Alex P. Thevaranjan, 2013. "How to deal with unprofitable customers? A salesforce compensation perspective," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-13-05, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    7. W. Bentley MacLeod, 2006. "Reputations, Relationships and the Enforcement of Incomplete Contracts," CESifo Working Paper Series 1730, CESifo.
    8. Donze, Jocelyn & Gunnes, Trude, 2018. "Becoming “We” instead of “I”, identity management and incentives in the workplace," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 105-120.
    9. Mathias Dewatripont & Patrick Legros, 2005. "Public-private partnerships: contract design and risk transfer," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/175947, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. Sloof, Randolph & van Praag, C. Mirjam, 2008. "Performance measurement, expectancy and agency theory: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 794-809, September.
    11. George Georgiadis & Balazs Szentes, 2020. "Optimal Monitoring Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(5), pages 2075-2107, September.
    12. Bellemare, Marc F., 2009. "The (Im)Possibility of Reverse Share Tenancy," MPRA Paper 23681, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Ozdenoren, Emre & Rubanov, Oleg, 2022. "Profit Sharing and Incentives," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    14. Dong, Gang Nathan, 2014. "Excessive financial services CEO pay and financial crisis: Evidence from calibration estimation," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 75-96.
    15. Prasad, Kislaya & Salmon, Timothy C., 2013. "Self Selection and market power in risk sharing contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 71-86.
    16. Arifovic, Jasmina & Karaivanov, Alexander, 2010. "Learning by doing vs. learning from others in a principal-agent model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1967-1992, October.
    17. Kaitong Hu & Zhenjie Ren & Junjian Yang, 2019. "Principal-agent problem with multiple principals," Working Papers hal-02088486, HAL.
    18. Jakv{s}a Cvitani'c & Dylan Possamai & Nizar Touzi, 2015. "Dynamic programming approach to principal-agent problems," Papers 1510.07111, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2017.
    19. Escobar, Juan F. & Pulgar, Carlos, 2017. "Motivating with simple contracts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 192-214.
    20. Yigal Gerchak & Christian Schmid, 2022. "Principal–agent models where a principal is only affected by extreme performances," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(2), pages 468-477, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jemstr:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:82-101. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/journals/JEMS/ .

    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.