IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v26yi2p385-426.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disagreement and the Allocation of Control

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Van den Steen

Abstract

This article studies the allocation of control when there is disagreement--in the sense of differing priors--about the right course of action. People then value control rights since they believe that their decisions are better than those of others. More disagreement (due to, e.g., fundamental uncertainty) increases the value that players attach to control. The article shows that all income and control of a project should then be concentrated in one hand: income rights should go more to people with more control since such people value income higher (because they have a higher opinion of the decisions made); control rights should go more to people with more income since they care more (and believe that they make better decisions). Different projects may be optimally "owned" by different people. Furthermore--with residual income exogenously allocated--complementary decisions should be more co-located, whereas substitute decisions should be more distributed. Confident people with a lot at stake should--in a wide range of settings--get more control. (JEL D7, D8, L2, M1) The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Yale University. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Van den Steen, 2010. "Disagreement and the Allocation of Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 385-426.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:26:y::i:2:p:385-426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jleo/ewn020
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Di Maggio, Marco, 2009. "Sweet Talk: A Theory of Persuasion," MPRA Paper 18697, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Millner, Antony & Ollivier, Hélène & Simon, Leo, 2014. "Policy experimentation, political competition, and heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 84-96.
    3. Becker, Bo & Ivashina, Victoria, 2016. "Covenant-Light Contracts And Creditor Coordination," Working Paper Series 325, Sveriges Riksbank (Central Bank of Sweden).
    4. Klepper, Steven & Thompson, Peter, 2010. "Disagreements and intra-industry spinoffs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 526-538, September.
    5. Josef Windsperger, 2013. "The governance of franchising networks," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 27, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Bryan Hong & Lorenz Kueng & Mu-Jeung Yang, 2015. "Estimating Management Practice Complementarity between Decentralization and Performance Pay," NBER Working Papers 20845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Zhang, Zhihong & Wang, Pin & Xu, Huichao, 2020. "Executives’ preference for integrity and product quality: Evidence from the Chinese food industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 374-385.
    8. Omiya, Shungo & Tamada, Yasunari & Tsai, Tsung-Sheng, 2017. "Optimal delegation with self-interested agents and information acquisition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 54-71.
    9. Julie Wulf & Harbir Singh, 2011. "How Do Acquirers Retain Successful Target CEOs? The Role of Governance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(12), pages 2101-2114, December.
    10. Eric Van den Steen, 2017. "A Formal Theory of Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(8), pages 2616-2636, August.
    11. Fulghieri, Paolo & Dicks, David, 2015. "Ambiguity, Disagreement, and Allocation of Control in Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 10400, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Eric Van den Steen, 2010. "On the origin of shared beliefs (and corporate culture)," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 617-648, December.
    13. Huang, Sheng & Maharjan, Johan & Thakor, Anjan V., 2020. "Disagreement-induced CEO turnover," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    14. Xie, Yinxi & Xie, Yang, 2017. "Machiavellian experimentation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 685-711.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration

    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:oup:jleorg:v:26:y::i:2:p:385-426. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    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.