IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlabec/v26y2008i4p595-619.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Is It Foolish to Reward for A While Benefiting from B?

Author

Listed:
  • Wendelin Schnedler

Abstract

A performance measure may or may not reflect the relative importance of different tasks for the production of benefit: it can be aligned or unaligned. Here, I examine when using an aligned measure generates a larger surplus in a principal-agent relationship than using an unaligned but otherwise identical measure. I find that (i) the agent's effort costs matter for the optimal way of measuring performance, and (ii) the optimal measure is not aligned but tilted toward tasks that the agent finds easy. Failing to recognize these insights may lead to false predictions about the use of incentives. (c) 2008 by The University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Wendelin Schnedler, 2008. "When Is It Foolish to Reward for A While Benefiting from B?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(4), pages 595-619, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlabec:v:26:y:2008:i:4:p:595-619
    DOI: 10.1086/591150
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/591150
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/591150?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. Banker, Rd & Datar, Sm, 1989. "Sensitivity, Precision, And Linear Aggregation Of Signals For Performance Evaluation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 21-39.
    2. Steven Shavell, 1979. "Risk Sharing and Incentives in the Principal and Agent Relationship," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 55-73, Spring.
    3. George Baker & Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1994. "Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 1125-1156.
    4. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    5. George Baker, 2000. "The Use of Performance Measures in Incentive Contracting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 415-420, May.
    6. Srikant Datar & Susan Cohen Kulp & Richard A. Lambert, 2001. "Balancing Performance Measures," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 75-92, June.
    7. Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987. "Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-940, December.
    8. Steven D. Sklivas, 1987. "The Strategic Choice of Managerial Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 452-458, Autumn.
    9. J. A. Mirrlees, 1999. "The Theory of Moral Hazard and Unobservable Behaviour: Part I," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 3-21.
    10. Kim, Sk & Suh, Ys, 1991. "Ranking Of Accounting Information-Systems For Management Control," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 386-396.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Theodor Vladasel & Simon C. Parker & Randolph Sloof & Mirjam van Praag, 2024. "Revenue drift, incentives, and effort allocation in social enterprises," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 630-651, August.
    2. Czerny, Achim I. & Fosgerau, Mogens & Jost, Peter-J. & van Ommeren, Jos N., 2019. "Why pay for jobs (and not for tasks)?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 419-433.
    3. Manthei, Kathrin & Sliwka, Dirk, 2018. "Multitasking and Subjective Performance Evaluations: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment in a Bank," IZA Discussion Papers 11581, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Kragl, Jenny & Schöttner, Anja, 2011. "Wage Floors and Optimal Job Design," VfS Annual Conference 2011 (Frankfurt, Main): The Order of the World Economy - Lessons from the Crisis 48731, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Dietrichson, Jens, 2013. "Coordination Incentives, Performance Measurement and Resource Allocation in Public Sector Organizations," Working Papers 2013:26, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    6. Jenny Kragl & Anja Schöttner, 2014. "Wage Floors, Imperfect Performance Measures, And Optimal Job Design," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(2), pages 525-550, May.
    7. Carsten Helm & Franz Wirl, 2021. "Multitasking: incentivizing agents differing either in their work ethic or intrinsic motivation," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 41-65, January.
    8. Delfgaauw, Josse & Souverijn, Michiel, 2016. "Biased supervision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 107-125.
    9. Chen, Bo, 2012. "All-or-nothing payments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 133-142.
    10. Poyago-Theotoky Joanna & Yong Soo Keong, 2019. "Managerial Delegation Contracts, “Green” R&D and Emissions Taxation," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 1-10, June.
    11. Schnedler, Wendelin, 2013. "Incentive Design and Mis-Allocated Effort," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79775, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Paul A. Grout & Wendelin Schnedler, 2008. "Non-Profit Organizations in a Bureaucratic Environment," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 08/202, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    13. Butschek, Sebastian & Kampkötter, Patrick & Sliwka, Dirk, 2017. "Paying Gig Workers," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168149, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Ederington Josh & Minier Jenny & Jill Stowe C., 2019. "Risk and Discrimination," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 19(3), pages 1-14, July.
    15. Thiele, Veikko, 2010. "Task-specific abilities in multi-task principal-agent relationships," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 690-698, August.
    16. Jenny Kragl & Anja Schöttner, 2014. "Wage Floors, Imperfect Performance Measures, And Optimal Job Design," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55, pages 525-550, May.
    17. Kathrin Manthei & Dirk Sliwka, 2019. "Multitasking and Subjective Performance Evaluations: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment in a Bank," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(12), pages 5861-5883, December.
    18. repec:awi:wpaper:0474 is not listed 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. Wendelin Schnedler, 2003. "On the Prudence of Rewarding A While Hoping for B," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 03/067, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    2. Thiele, Veikko, 2007. "Task-Specific Abilities in Multi-Task Agency Relations," MPRA Paper 2470, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Thiele, Veikko, 2007. "Performance measurement in multi-task agencies," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 148-163, September.
    4. Michael Raith, 2008. "Specific knowledge and performance measurement," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 1059-1079, December.
    5. Smith, Steven D. & Thomas, Tyler F., 2024. "The effects of strategic alignment and strategic clarity on multidimensional task performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Dirk Sliwka, 2002. "On the Use of Nonfinancial Performance Measures in Management Compensation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 487-511, September.
    7. Bengt Holmström, 2017. "Pay for Performance and Beyond," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(7), pages 1753-1777, July.
    8. Rajiv D. Banker & Masako Darrough & Shaopeng Li & Lucas Threinen, 2019. "The Value of Precontract Information About an Agent's Ability in the Presence of Moral Hazard and Adverse Selection," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(5), pages 1201-1245, December.
    9. Narisa Tianjing Dai & Xi (Jason) Kuang & Guliang Tang, 2018. "Differential Weighting of Objective Versus Subjective Measures in Performance Evaluation: Experimental Evidence," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 129-148, January.
    10. Jörg Budde, 2007. "Performance Measure Congruity and the Balanced Scorecard," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 515-539, June.
    11. Budde, Jörg, 2006. "Distorted performance measurement and relational contracts," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 203, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    12. Robert Gibbons, 2005. "Incentives Between Firms (and Within)," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(1), pages 2-17, January.
    13. Thiele, Veikko, 2010. "Task-specific abilities in multi-task principal-agent relationships," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 690-698, August.
    14. Olmos, Marta Fernandez & Martinez, Jorge Rosell, 2011. "The Quality-Quantity Trade-off in the Principal-Agent Framework," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, January.
    15. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2373-2437 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Alberto Bayo-Moriones & Jose E. Galdon-Sanchez & Sara Martinez-de-Morentin, 2017. "Performance Measurement and Incentive Intensity," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 496-546, December.
    17. Ola Kvaløy & Trond E. Olsen, 2023. "Balanced Scorecards: A Relational Contract Approach," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 619-652, May.
    18. Corgnet, Brice & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2013. "Are you a good employee or simply a good guy? Influence costs and contract design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 259-272.
    19. Ziss, Steffen, 1999. "Divisionalization and strategic managerial incentives in oligopoly under uncertainty," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(8), pages 1163-1187, November.
    20. Lambert, Richard A., 2001. "Contracting theory and accounting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 3-87, December.
    21. Kroos, P., 2009. "The incentive effects of performance measures and target setting," Other publications TiSEM 944001f9-198b-4b81-8824-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    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:ucp:jlabec:v:26:y:2008:i:4:p:595-619. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JOLE .

    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.