IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tse/wpaper/22250.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Managerial Effort Incentives and Market Collusion

Author

Listed:
  • Aubert, Cécile

Abstract

We investigate the interactions between managers’ incentives to collude or compete, and incentives to exert effort. A manager privately chooses the competitive strategy of the firm, and his own effort to improve productivity; He may substitute collusion to effort to increase profits. High profit targets — i.e., strong effort incentives — make participating in a cartel more attractive. To answer this double moral hazard, owners may have to give the manager information rents, and to choose inefficient effort levels. This affects cartel sustainability and profitability. Because of reduced internal efficiency, welfare losses may arise even when the industry remains competitive. Antitrust policy has a novel value, specifically thanks to individual sanctions: They foster internal efficiency in competing firms while worsening it in cartelized firms. This improves both efficiency under competition and cartel deterrence. Individual fines are thus more beneficial than corporate fines; criminal sanctions are even more effective. Last, individual leniency programs have ambiguous effects, even when not used in equilibrium.

Suggested Citation

  • Aubert, Cécile, 2009. "Managerial Effort Incentives and Market Collusion," TSE Working Papers 09-127, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  • Handle: RePEc:tse:wpaper:22250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/medias/doc/wp/io/wp_io_127_2009.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph E. Harrington, 2005. "Optimal Cartel Pricing In The Presence Of An Antitrust Authority," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(1), pages 145-169, February.
    2. Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2000. "Stock-Related Compensation and Product-Market Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 22-42, Spring.
    3. Dan Bernhardt & Christopher P. Chambers, 2006. "Profit sharing (with workers) facilitates collusion (among firms)," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 483-502, September.
    4. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13637 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. 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.
    6. Cécile Aubert, 2007. "Instruments for Cartel Deterrence, and Conflicts of Interests," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: The Political Economy of Antitrust, pages 123-148, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    7. Klaus M. Schmidt, 1997. "Managerial Incentives and Product Market Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(2), pages 191-213.
    8. Levenstein, Margaret & Suslow, Valerie Y. & Oswald, Lynda J., 2003. "Contemporary International Cartels And Developing Countries: Economic Effects And Implications For Competition Policy," Working Papers 14590, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    9. Aubert, Cecile & Rey, Patrick & Kovacic, William E., 2006. "The impact of leniency and whistle-blowing programs on cartels," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1241-1266, November.
    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. María C. Avramovich, 2020. "The Welfare Implications of the Meeting Design of a Cartel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 57(1), pages 59-83, August.
    2. Daniel Herold, 2017. "The Impact of Incentive Pay on Corporate Crime," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201752, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    3. Johannes Paha, 2013. "The Impact of Persistent Shocks and Concave Objective Functions on Collusive Behavior," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201328, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    4. Jaideep Chowdhury, 2014. "Impact of financial constraint on incentive compensation and product market behavior," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(1), pages 115-124.
    5. Motta, Massimo & Fabra, Natalia, 2013. "Antitrust Fines in Times of Crisis," CEPR Discussion Papers 9290, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Fonseca, Miguel A. & Gonçalves, Ricardo & Pinho, Joana & Tabacco, Giovanni A., 2022. "How do antitrust regimes impact on cartel formation and managers’ labor market? An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 643-662.

    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. María C. Avramovich, 2020. "The Welfare Implications of the Meeting Design of a Cartel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 57(1), pages 59-83, August.
    2. R. Andergassen, 2011. "Board of director collusion, managerial incentives and firm values," Working Papers wp795, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    3. Marc Crummenerl & Tilmann Doll & Christian Koziol, 2015. "How to Pay Envious Managers – a Theoretical Analysis," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 21(4), pages 811-832, September.
    4. Emons, Winand, 2020. "The effectiveness of leniency programs when firms choose the degree of collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Emilie Dargaud & Armel Jacques, 2015. "Endogenous firms’ organization, internal audit and leniency programs," Working Papers 1524, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    6. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2005. "Managerial incentives and collusive behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1501-1523, August.
    7. Joseph E. Harrington Jr. & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2007. "Collusion under monitoring of sales," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 314-331, June.
    8. Antonio Falato, 2006. "Paying to Make a Difference: Executive Compensation and Product Dynamics," 2006 Meeting Papers 690, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    9. 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.
    10. Kirstein, Roland & Kirstein, Annette, 2004. "Inefficient Intra-Firm Incentives Can Stabilize Cartels in Cournot Oligopolies," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2004-09, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    11. Waisman, Maya, 2013. "Product market competition and the cost of bank loans: Evidence from state antitakeover laws," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 4721-4737.
    12. Xavier Giroud & Holger M. Mueller, 2009. "Does Corporate Governance Matter in Competitive Industries?," NBER Working Papers 14877, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Sangeun Ha & Fangyuan Ma & Alminas Žaldokas, 2021. "Motivating Collusion," HKUST CEP Working Papers Series 202108, HKUST Center for Economic Policy.
    14. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2006. "How Do Cartels Operate?," Economics Working Paper Archive 531, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
    15. Karuna, Christo, 2007. "Industry product market competition and managerial incentives," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 275-297, July.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Vicente Cuñat & Maria Guadalupe, 2009. "Globalization and the Provision of Incentives inside the Firm: The Effect of Foreign Competition," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 179-212, April.
    19. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr & Joe Chen, 2005. "he Impact of the Corporate Leniency Program on Cartel Formation and the Cartel Price Path," Economics Working Paper Archive 528, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
    20. Vidhi Chhaochharia & Yaniv Grinstein & Gustavo Grullon & Roni Michaely, 2017. "Product Market Competition and Internal Governance: Evidence from the Sarbanes–Oxley Act," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1405-1424, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    collusion; managerial incentives; leniency programs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    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:tse:wpaper:22250. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tsetofr.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.