IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jeicoo/v19y2024i3d10.1007_s11403-022-00357-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incomplete incentive contracts in complex task environments: an agent-based simulation with minimal intelligence agents

Author

Listed:
  • Friederike Wall

    (University of Klagenfurt)

Abstract

Incentive contracts often do not govern all task elements for which an employee is responsible. Prior research, particularly in the tradition of principal-agent theory, has studied incomplete incentive contracts as multi-task problems focusing on how to motivate the employee to incur effort for a not-contracted task element. Thus, emphasis is on the “vertical” relation between superior and subordinate, where both are modeled as gifted economic actors. This paper takes another perspective focusing on the “horizontal” interferences of—contracted and not-contracted—task elements across various employees in an organization and, hence, on the complexity of an organization’s task environment. In order to disentangle the interactions among tasks from agents’ behavior, the paper pursues a minimal intelligence approach. An agent-based simulation model based on the framework of NK fitness landscapes is employed. In the simulation experiments, artificial organizations search for superior performance, and the experiments control for the complexity of the task environment and the level of contractual incompleteness. The results suggest that the complexity of the task environment in terms of interactions among task elements may considerably shape the effects of incomplete incentive contracts. In particular, the results indicate that moderate incompleteness of incentive contracts may be beneficial with respect to organizational performance when intra-organizational complexity is high. This is caused by stabilization of search resulting from incomplete contracts. Moreover, interactions may induce that the not-contracted task elements could serve as means objectives, i.e., contributing to achieving contracted task elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Friederike Wall, 2024. "Incomplete incentive contracts in complex task environments: an agent-based simulation with minimal intelligence agents," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 19(3), pages 523-552, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jeicoo:v:19:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11403-022-00357-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11403-022-00357-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11403-022-00357-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11403-022-00357-6?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Tirole, 2009. "Cognition and Incomplete Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 265-294, March.
    2. Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, 2014. "Bounded rationality: the two cultures," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 361-374, December.
    3. Baker, George P, 1992. "Incentive Contracts and Performance Measurement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(3), pages 598-614, June.
    4. Lambert, Richard A., 2001. "Contracting theory and accounting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 3-87, December.
    5. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    6. Gode, Dhananjay K & Sunder, Shyam, 1993. "Allocative Efficiency of Markets with Zero-Intelligence Traders: Market as a Partial Substitute for Individual Rationality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(1), pages 119-137, February.
    7. John Conlisk, 1996. "Why Bounded Rationality?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 669-700, June.
    8. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2007. "Patterned Interactions in Complex Systems: Implications for Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1068-1085, July.
    9. Joseph D. Blackburn & Dean H. Kropp & Robert A. Millen, 1986. "A Comparison of Strategies to Dampen Nervousness in MRP Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 413-429, April.
    10. Levinthal, Daniel & March, James G., 1981. "A model of adaptive organizational search," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 307-333, December.
    11. Thiele, Veikko, 2007. "Performance measurement in multi-task agencies," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 148-163, September.
    12. MacLeod, W Bentley & Malcomson, James M, 1998. "Motivation and Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(3), pages 388-411, June.
    13. Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2002. "Misperceiving Interactions Among Complements and Substitutes: Organizational Consequences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(7), pages 900-916, July.
    14. Stephan Leitner & Friederike Wall, 2021. "Decision-facilitating information in hidden-action setups: an agent-based approach," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 16(2), pages 323-358, April.
    15. Sing What Tee & Paul L. Bowen & Peta Doyle & Fiona H. Rohde, 2007. "Factors influencing organizations to improve data quality in their information systems," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 47(2), pages 335-355, June.
    16. Borgers, Tilman & Sarin, Rajiv, 2000. "Naive Reinforcement Learning with Endogenous Aspirations," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 41(4), pages 921-950, November.
    17. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 101-122, April.
    18. Robert C. Carlson & James V. Jucker & Dean H. Kropp, 1979. "Less Nervous MRP Systems: A Dynamic Economic Lot-Sizing Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(8), pages 754-761, August.
    19. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
    20. Chen, Shu-Heng, 2012. "Varieties of agents in agent-based computational economics: A historical and an interdisciplinary perspective," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-25.
    21. Robert Axtell, 2007. "What economic agents do: How cognition and interaction lead to emergence and complexity," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 20(2), pages 105-122, September.
    22. Bennett Levitan & Stuart Kauffman, 1995. "Adaptive Walks with Noisy Fitness Measurements," Working Papers 95-04-039, Santa Fe Institute.
    23. Sarath Sanga, 2018. "Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Approach," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 650-679.
    24. Friederike Wall, 2017. "Learning To Incentivize In Different Modes Of Coordination," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02n03), pages 1-29, 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. Friederike Wall, 2023. "Modeling managerial search behavior based on Simon’s concept of satisficing," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 265-299, June.
    2. Friederike Wall, 2021. "Modeling Managerial Search Behavior based on Simon's Concept of Satisficing," Papers 2104.14002, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    3. Friederike Wall, 2016. "Agent-based modeling in managerial science: an illustrative survey and study," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 135-193, January.
    4. Friederike Wall, 2019. "Emergence of Coordination in Growing Decision-Making Organizations: The Role of Complexity, Search Strategy, and Cost of Effort," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-26, December.
    5. Friederike Wall, 2017. "Learning To Incentivize In Different Modes Of Coordination," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02n03), pages 1-29, March.
    6. Friederike Wall, 2015. "Beneficial Effects Of Randomized Organizational Change On Performance," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(05n06), pages 1-23, August.
    7. Patrick Reinwald & Stephan Leitner & Friederike Wall, 2021. "Limited intelligence and performance-based compensation: An agent-based model of the hidden action problem," Papers 2107.03764, arXiv.org.
    8. Patrick Reinwald & Stephan Leitner & Friederike Wall, 2021. "Effects of limited and heterogeneous memory in hidden-action situations," Papers 2105.12469, arXiv.org.
    9. Dirk Martignoni & Thomas Keil & Markus Lang, 2020. "Focus in Searching Core–Periphery Structures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 266-286, March.
    10. Dietrichson, Jens, 2013. "Coordination Incentives, Performance Measurement and Resource Allocation in Public Sector Organizations," Working Papers 2013:26, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    11. Giannoccaro, Ilaria, 2015. "Adaptive supply chains in industrial districts: A complexity science approach focused on learning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 576-589.
    12. Luis Garicano & Luis Rayo, 2016. "Why Organizations Fail: Models and Cases," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 137-192, March.
    13. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2373-2437 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Daniel A. Levinthal & Maciej Workiewicz, 2018. "When Two Bosses Are Better Than One: Nearly Decomposable Systems and Organizational Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 207-224, April.
    15. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 4-21, February.
    16. Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2003. "Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 287-318.
    17. Ernst Fehr & Armin Falk, 1999. "Wage Rigidity in a Competitive Incomplete Contract Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(1), pages 106-134, February.
    18. Tomasz Obloj & Metin Sengul, 2020. "What do multiple objectives really mean for performance? Empirical evidence from the French manufacturing sector," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2518-2547, December.
    19. Oliver Baumann & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2013. "Dealing with Complexity: Integrated vs. Chunky Search Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 116-132, February.
    20. Patrick Bolton & Antoine Faure-Grimaud, 2009. "Thinking Ahead: The Decision Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(4), pages 1205-1238.
    21. James M. Malcomson, 2012. "Relational Incentive Contracts [The Handbook of Organizational Economics]," Introductory Chapters,, Princeton University Press.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agent-based modeling; Complexity; Incomplete contracts; NK fitness landscapes; Satisficing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects

    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:spr:jeicoo:v:19:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11403-022-00357-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.