IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bol/bodewp/664.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficient monitoring and control in intangibles-driven economies: is full independence always required?

Author

Listed:
  • Y. Biondi
  • P. Giannoccolo
  • A. Reberioux

Abstract

The current crisis puts at issue the self-regulated market system of monitoring and control. Claims for restoring the proper functioning of market economies in general, and financial markets in particular, call for either establishing new sets of rules or creating new supervising authorities. Both claims rely on the received mantra of full independence that applies whenever control is concerned. However, our analysis pays attention to a neglected aspect of monitoring and control, which requires the capability to discovering and understanding flaws in and dangers from the inner congeries of the business affair under examination. Arguably, this business-specific expertise and independence trade off. To overcome this problem, an optimal share of non-independent controllers may be chosen from or appointed by stakeholding constituencies of the business affair. They can provide proficient monitoring and control without colluding, in principle, with executive managers of the activity to be controlled.

Suggested Citation

  • Y. Biondi & P. Giannoccolo & A. Reberioux, 2009. "Efficient monitoring and control in intangibles-driven economies: is full independence always required?," Working Papers 664, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    • Handle: RePEc:bol:bodewp:664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://amsacta.unibo.it/4582/1/664.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Biondi, Yuri & Rebérioux, Antoine, 2012. "The governance of intangibles: Rethinking financial reporting and the board of directors," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 279-293.
    2. Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2001. "How To Compete: The Impact Of Workplace Practices And Information Technology On Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 434-445, August.
    3. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2000. "The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 3-22, Fall.
    4. Yuri Biondi & Vincent Bignon & Xavier Ragot, 2004. "An economic analysis of fair value : the evolution of accounting principles in European Legislation," Post-Print halshs-00203363, HAL.
    5. Carol Corrado & Charles Hulten & Daniel Sichel, 2009. "Intangible Capital And U.S. Economic Growth," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(3), pages 661-685, September.
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 347-374, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Eve Caroli & John Van Reenen, 2001. "Skill-Biased Organizational Change? Evidence from A Panel of British and French Establishments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1449-1492.
    8. Kim, YoungGak & 金, 榮愨, 2007. "A Survey on Intangible Capital," CEI Working Paper Series 2007-10, Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    9. Klein, April, 1998. "Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 275-303, April.
    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. Yuri Biondi & Antoine Rebérioux, 2012. "The governance of intangibles: Rethinking financial reporting and the board of directors," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 279-293, December.
    2. Y. Biondi & P. Giannoccolo & A. Reberioux, 2010. "Financial disclosure and the Board: A case for non-independent directors," Working Papers 689, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    3. Derek C. Jones & Takao Kato, 2011. "The Impact of Teams on Output, Quality, and Downtime: An Empirical Analysis Using Individual Panel Data," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 64(2), pages 215-240, January.
    4. Marie Le Mouel & Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2015. "Cross-Country Estimates of Employment and Investment in Organisational Capital: A Task-Based Methodology Using Piaac Data," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2015/8, OECD Publishing.
    5. Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2004. "What's driving the new economy?: the benefits of workplace innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 97-116, February.
    6. Bloom, Nicholas & Van Reenen, John, 2011. "Human Resource Management and Productivity," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 19, pages 1697-1767, Elsevier.
    7. Dostie Benoit & Jayaraman Rajshri, 2012. "Organizational Redesign, Information Technologies and Workplace Productivity," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-41, February.
    8. Thum-Thysen, Anna & Voigt, Peter & Weiss, Christoph, 2021. "Complementarities in capital formation and production: Tangible and intangible assets across Europe," EIB Working Papers 2021/12, European Investment Bank (EIB).
    9. Stefanie Haller & Iulia Siedschlag, 2011. "Determinants of ICT adoption: evidence from firm-level data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(26), pages 3775-3788.
    10. Hulten, Charles R., 2010. "Growth Accounting," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 987-1031, Elsevier.
    11. Thum-Thysen, Anna & Voigt, Peter & Bilbao-Osorio, Beñat & Maier, Christoph & Ognyanova, Diana, 2019. "Investment dynamics in Europe: Distinct drivers and barriers for investing in intangible versus tangible assets?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 77-88.
    12. Nicholas Bloom & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2010. "Recent Advances in the Empirics of Organizational Economics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 105-137, September.
    13. Edquist, Harald & Henrekson, Magnus, 2017. "Do R&D and ICT affect total factor productivity growth differently?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 106-119.
    14. Mirko Draca & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2006. "Productivity and ICT: A Review of the Evidence," CEP Discussion Papers dp0749, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    15. Atzeni, Gianfranco E. & Carboni, Oliviero A., 2006. "ICT productivity and firm propensity to innovative investment: Evidence from Italian microdata," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 139-156, June.
    16. Martin Carree & Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos, 2011. "A note on testing for complementarity and substitutability in the case of multiple practices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 263-269, June.
    17. Pascal Petit, 2010. "Innovation and Services: On Biases and Beyond," Chapters, in: Faïz Gallouj & Faridah Djellal (ed.), The Handbook of Innovation and Services, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    19. Philippe Askenazy & Eve Caroli, 2006. "Innovative work practices, information technologies and working conditions: evidence for France," EconomiX Working Papers 2006-2, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    20. Zand, Fardad & Van Beers, Cees & Van Leeuwen, George, 2011. "Information technology, organizational change and firm productivity: A panel study of complementarity effects and clustering patterns in Manufacturing and Services," MPRA Paper 46469, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bol:bodewp:664. 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: Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sebolit.html .

    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.