IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbece/fsi98303.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The legal framework for corporate governance: explaining the development of contract law in Germany and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Casper, Steven

Abstract

How are new forms of industrial organization accommodated into a country'slegal frameworks, and what effect does this have on the ability of firms toinnovate. Variations in the broad institutional organization of the German andUS political economies result in different processes of contract lawmodernization in the two countries, with important implications for innovation trajectories. The German institutional infrastructure encourages firms todevelop cooperative "diversified quality production" (DQP) inter-firm strategies.This is promoted through highly regulative contract laws and the existence ofstrong trade associations that firms engage to create standardized industryframeworks. These contracting arrangements allow the diffusion ofstandardized governance structures showing firms how to create rules neededto manage complex new forms of organization. While strongly supporting DQPstrategies and discouraging opportunistic product market strategies, Germanpatterns of contract law regulation place important constraints against moreinnovative product market strategies. In the United States legal resources aredecentralized across firms, trade associations have few law-makingcompetencies, and courts do not regulate the distribution of risks across firms.Contractual frameworks are developed on a firm-by-firm basis and slowlyaccommodated within the legal system through the generation of courtprecedent. This system encourages radical innovation in the law, an importantprerequisite for innovative product market strategies more generally. However,the paper shows that a necessary trade-off of legal innovation in the US is thatcourts cannot implement German-style contract law regulation to constrainopportunism, while the decentralization of legal resource inhibits the creation ofstandardized contractual frameworks needed for DQP strategies. Through anextensive game theory analysis of bargaining between courts and large firms,the paper explains why these equilibria are maintained, despite strong incentives in the German case for some large firms to deviate.

Suggested Citation

  • Casper, Steven, 1998. "The legal framework for corporate governance: explaining the development of contract law in Germany and the United States," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economic Change and Employment FS I 98-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbece:fsi98303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/44091/1/250473178.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. repec:cdl:ciders:2397 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Amable, Bruno, 1999. "Institutional complementarity and diversity of social systems of innovation and production," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economic Change and Employment FS I 99-309, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Casper, Steven, 1999. "National institutional frameworks and high-technology innovation in Germany: the case of biotechnology," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economic Change and Employment FS I 99-306, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    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. S. Arunachalam & Sridhar N. Ramaswami & Pol Herrmann & Doug Walker, 2018. "Innovation pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing capabilities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 744-766, July.
    2. Krickx, Guido A., 1995. "Vertical integration in the computer mainframe industry: A transaction cost interpretation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 75-91, January.
    3. Soufiane Mezzourh & Walid A Nakara, 2009. "Governance and innovation : A Knowledge-based approach [La gouvernance de l'innovation : une approche par la connaissance]," Post-Print halshs-01955966, HAL.
    4. Hua Tang, 2022. "The Effect of ESG Performance on Corporate Innovation in China: The Mediating Role of Financial Constraints and Agency Cost," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Morricone, Serena & Munari, Federico & Oriani, Raffaele & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2017. "Commercialization Strategy and IPO Underpricing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1133-1141.
    6. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    7. Tarifa Fernández, Jorge & de Burgos Jiménez, Jerónimo & Céspedes Lorente, José Joaquín, 2018. "Absorptive capacity as a confounder of the process of supply chain integration," MPRA Paper 120125, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2018.
    8. Laura Barbieri & Daniela Bragoli & Flavia Cortelezzi & Giovanni Marseguerra, 2015. "Public Support to Innovation Strategies," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali dises1509, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    9. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    10. Massimo Colombo & Annalisa Croce & Samuele Murtinu, 2014. "Ownership structure, horizontal agency costs and the performance of high-tech entrepreneurial firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 265-282, February.
    11. Ariño, Africa & García-Canal, Esteban & Valdes, Ana, 1999. "Longevity of strategic alliances between competitors: A dynamic value creation approach," IESE Research Papers D/404, IESE Business School.
    12. Zemsky, Peter & Adner, Ron, 2003. "Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 3994, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Frida Thomas Pacho, 2018. "Diversified Network Effects on Innovation Performance in Tanzania: Innovation Strategy in Service Firms," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Innovation, Macrothink Institute, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Innovation, vol. 5(1), pages 1-1, December.
    14. Dwibedy, Punyashlok, 2022. "Informal competition and product innovation decisions of new ventures and incumbents across developing and transitioning countries," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    15. Richard Harris & John Moffat, 2011. "R&D, Innovation and Exporting," SERC Discussion Papers 0073, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    16. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    17. Markus Solf, 2004. "Unternehmenskooperationen als Folge von Informations- und Kommunikations-technologieveränderungen: Eine theoretische Analyse," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 146-167, March.
    18. Annika Rickne, 2006. "Connectivity and Performance of Science-based Firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 393-407, May.
    19. Holger Patzelt & Dean A. Shepherd, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship at Universities: Academic Entrepreneurs’ Assessment of Policy Programs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 319-340, January.
    20. Aschhoff, Birgit & Baier, Elisabeth & Crass, Dirk & Hud, Martin & Hünermund, Paul & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Rammer, Christian & Schricke, Esther & Schubert, Torben & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Innovation in Germany - Results of the German CIS 2006 to 2010. Background report on the Innovation Surveys 2007, 2009 and 2011 of the Mannheim Innovation Panel," ZEW Dokumentationen 13-01, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:zbw:wzbece:fsi98303. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wzbbbde.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.