IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sjobre/v56y2004i1d10.1007_bf03372729.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategische Kostenanpassung oder relative Leistungsbewertung — Was ist besser?

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Dierkes

    (Philipps-Universität Marburg)

Abstract

Summary To control decentralized investment or profit center decisions it is recommended to give managers a share in their own profits. But in imperfectly competitive product markets it is better for the rivals to use a relative performance evaluation or a performance evaluation based on adjusted costs. It is still unknown which of these incentive schemes has more benefit for a firm. This article shows that in the case of a symmetric duopoly the relative performance evaluation is superior to the performance evaluation based on adjusted costs and that the uniform choice of the relative performance evaluation is a nash equilibrium.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Dierkes, 2004. "Strategische Kostenanpassung oder relative Leistungsbewertung — Was ist besser?," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 45-59, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sjobre:v:56:y:2004:i:1:d:10.1007_bf03372729
    DOI: 10.1007/BF03372729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF03372729
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF03372729?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. Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987. "Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-940, December.
    2. Steven D. Sklivas, 1987. "The Strategic Choice of Managerial Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 452-458, Autumn.
    3. Michael Alles & Srikant Datar, 1998. "Strategic Transfer Pricing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 451-461, April.
    4. Rogerson, William P, 1997. "Intertemporal Cost Allocation and Managerial Investment Incentives: A Theory Explaining the Use of Economic Value Added as a Performance Measure," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 770-795, August.
    5. Reichelstein, S, 2000. "Providing managerial incentives: Cash flows versus accrual accounting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 243-269.
    6. Fumas, Vicente Salas, 1992. "Relative performance evaluation of management : The effects on industrial competition and risk sharing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 473-489, September.
    7. Rajesh K. Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1999. "Executive Compensation, Strategic Competition, and Relative Performance Evaluation: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(6), pages 1999-2043, December.
    8. Sunil Dutta & Stefan Reichelstein, 2000. "Controlling Investment Decisions: Hurdle Rates and Intertemporal Cost Allocation," CESifo Working Paper Series 354, CESifo.
    9. Vickers, John, 1985. "Delegation and the Theory of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(380a), pages 138-147, Supplemen.
    10. Stefan Dierkes & Stephanie Hanrath, 2002. "Steuerung dezentraler Investitionsentscheidungen auf Basis eines modifizierten Residualgewinns," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 246-267, May.
    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. Liang, Wen-Jung & Tseng, Ching-Chih & Wang, Kuang-Cheng Andy, 2011. "Location choice with delegation: Bertrand vs. Cournot competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 1774-1781, July.
    2. Ya‐chin Wang & Leonard F.s. Wang, 2009. "Equivalence Of Competition Mode In A Vertically Differentiated Duopoly With Delegation," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(4), pages 577-590, December.
    3. Werner Neus & Manfred Stadler, 2018. "Common holdings and strategic manager compensation: The case of an asymmetric triopoly," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(7), pages 814-820, October.
    4. Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca & Sodini, Mauro, 2012. "Nonlinear dynamics in a Cournot duopoly with relative profit delegation," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 45(12), pages 1469-1478.
    5. Stefan Beiner & Markus M. Schmid & Gabrielle Wanzenried, 2011. "Product Market Competition, Managerial Incentives and Firm Valuation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 17(2), pages 331-366, March.
    6. Cellini, Roberto & Lambertini, Luca & Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P., 2020. "Strategic inattention, delegation and endogenous market structure," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    7. Govert Vroom, 2006. "Organizational Design and the Intensity of Rivalry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1689-1702, November.
    8. Lei Fang & Sai Zhao, 2022. "The manufacturing–marketing conflict under vertical product differentiation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 4028-4040, December.
    9. Berr, Fabian, 2011. "Stackelberg equilibria in managerial delegation games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(2), pages 251-262, July.
    10. Jumpei Hamamura & Vinay Ramani, 2023. "Social performance versus relative performance evaluation, asymmetric costs, and quantity competition under managerial delegation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(3), pages 1706-1719, April.
    11. Stadler, Manfred & Neus, Werner, 2018. "Cross Holdings and Strategic Manager Compensation. The Case of an Asymmetric Triopoly," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181534, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Delbono, Flavio & Lambertini, Luca, 2020. "On the collusive nature of managerial contracts based on comparative performance," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 12-18.
    13. Yoshifumi Hino & Yusuke Zennyo, 2017. "Corporate social responsibility and strategic relationships," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 64(3), pages 231-244, September.
    14. Werner Neus & Manfred Stadler & Maximiliane Unsorg, 2020. "Market structure, common ownership, and coordinated manager compensation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1268, October.
    15. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2005. "Managerial incentives and collusive behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1501-1523, August.
    16. Lee, Jen-Yao & Wang, Leonard F. S. & Sun, Ji, 2022. "Relative-performance delegation destabilizes upstream collusion," MPRA Paper 114939, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 12 Oct 2022.
    17. repec:hok:dpaper:307 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Güth, Werner & Pull, Kerstin & Stadler, Manfred, 2012. "Strategic delegation in price competition," University of Tübingen Working Papers in Business and Economics 43, University of Tuebingen, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, School of Business and Economics.
    19. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf & Dae-Hee Yoon, 2008. "Friction in Related-Party Trade When a Rival Is Also a Customer," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1850-1860, November.
    20. Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca, 2011. "Stability analysis in a Cournot duopoly with managerial sales delegation and bounded rationality," MPRA Paper 33828, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Miguel Antón & Florian Ederer & Mireia Giné & Martin Schmalz, 2023. "Common Ownership, Competition, and Top Management Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(5), pages 1294-1355.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    M41; C7;

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory

    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:sjobre:v:56:y:2004:i:1:d:10.1007_bf03372729. 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.