IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ijecbs/v28y2021i3p335-361.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agent Motivation and Principal Anticipation: Non-Monotonicity, Intentions, and Other Factors

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy Flannery
  • Stephen Roberts

Abstract

We design an experiment to test what motivates agents to choose higher effort and how well principals anticipate agent responses. Principals rank five contracts where a higher ranking increases the likelihood of a contract's implementation. In one treatment, those rankings remain hidden from agents; in the other, agents view the rankings. Agent response to contract structure and monetary incentives largely conforms to our predictions: agents demonstrate a preference for monotonic contracts over non-monotonic contracts, and the vast majority responds favorably to contracts where high effort is a best response. Surprisingly, offering a flat contract that exactly compensates agents for effort performs no better than offering nothing. Principals, however, poorly anticipate agent response to contracts, regardless of the observability of rankings. Additionally, although differences in observable rankings only affect agent behavior in minor ways, principals' rankings between the two treatments indicate principals believed different rankings would significantly influence agents when observable.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy Flannery & Stephen Roberts, 2021. "Agent Motivation and Principal Anticipation: Non-Monotonicity, Intentions, and Other Factors," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 335-361, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ijecbs:v:28:y:2021:i:3:p:335-361
    DOI: 10.1080/13571516.2021.1893570
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13571516.2021.1893570
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13571516.2021.1893570?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.

    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:taf:ijecbs:v:28:y:2021:i:3:p:335-361. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIJB20 .

    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.