IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reecde/v5y2000i2p177-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

original papers : Project evaluation and organizational form

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Gehrig
  • Pierre Regibeau
  • Kate Rockett

Abstract

In situations of imperfect testing and communication, as suggested by Sah and Stiglitz (AER, 1986), organizational forms can be identified with different rules of aggregating evaluations of individual screening units. In this paper, we discuss the relative merits of polyarchical organizations versus hierarchical organizations in evaluating cost-reducing R&D projects when individual units' decision thresholds are fully endogenous. Contrary to the results of Sah and Stiglitz, we find that the relative merit of an organizational form depends on the curvature of the screening functions of the individual evaluation units. We find that for certain parameters organizations would want to implement asymmetric decision rules across screening units. This allows us to derive sufficient conditions for a polyarchy to dominate a hierarchy. We also find conditions for which the cost curves associated with the two organizational forms cross each other. In this case the optimal organizational form will depend on product market conditions and on the "lumpiness" of cost-reducing R&D.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Gehrig & Pierre Regibeau & Kate Rockett, 2000. "original papers : Project evaluation and organizational form," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 5(2), pages 177-199.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:reecde:v:5:y:2000:i:2:p:177-199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/10058/papers/0005002/00050177.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    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. Gehrig, Thomas & Stenbacka, Rune, 2023. "R&D and subsidy policy with imperfect project classification," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. Swank, Otto & Visser, Bauke, 2008. "The consequences of endogenizing information for the performance of a sequential decision procedure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 667-681, March.
    3. Gehrig, Thomas & Stenbacka, Rune, 2021. "Journal competition and the quality of published research: Simultaneous versus sequential screening," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    4. Gehrig, Thomas & Bester, Helmut & ,, 2012. "Loan Sales and Screening Incentives," CEPR Discussion Papers 9084, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Organisations; screening; information aggregation; hierarchies; polyarchies;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure

    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:reecde:v:5:y:2000:i:2:p:177-199. 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: 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.