Moral hazard and contracts

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Moral Hazard. Moral hazard occurs when a person or organization that is insulated from risk may behave differently from what it would it if were fully.
Advertisements

Optimal Contracts under Adverse Selection
Hal Varian Intermediate Microeconomics Chapter Thirty-Six
Chapter 37 Asymmetric Information In reality, it is often the case that one of the transacting party has less information than the other. Consider a market.
Michael R. Baye, Managerial Economics and Business Strategy, 3e. ©The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1999 Managerial Economics & Business Strategy Chapter.
Chapter 14 Markets with Asymmetric Information. Chapter 17Slide 2 Topics to be Discussed Quality Uncertainty and the Market for Lemons Market Signaling.
1 . 2 Uncertainty Dixit: Optimization in Economic Theory (Chapter 9)
Contracts and Mechanism Design What Contracts Accomplish Moral Hazard Adverse Selection (if time: Signaling)
14.1 Economic settings in which one side has better information than the other. Buying a Company Firm T is worth $20 a share or $80 (50-50 chances) depending.
Chapter Thirty-Three Law and Economics. Effects of Laws u Property right assignments affect –asset, income and wealth distributions; v e.g. nationalized.
Heterogeneity One limitation of the static LS model lies in the heterogeneity assumption. In reality, individuals differ in preference and in information.
Slide 1  2002 South-Western Publishing An assumption of pure competition was complete knowledge of all market information. But knowledge can be unevenly.
Introduction Organizations have a relatively large degree of discretion in deciding how to pay. Each employee’s pay is based upon individual performance,
Recruitment and effort of teachers The principal-agent problem Kjell G. Salvanes.
Interactions of Tax and Nontax Costs n Uncertainty u Symmetric uncertainty u Strategic uncertainty (information asymmetry) F Hidden action (moral hazard)
Health Insurance October 19, 2006 Insurance is defined as a means of protecting against risk. Risk is a state in which multiple outcomes are possible and.
Chapter 11 Game Theory and Asymmetric Information
Chapter 19 Contracts and Moral Hazards
PCP Microeconomics Session 12 Takako Fujiwara-Greve.
Asymmetric Information ECON 370: Microeconomic Theory Summer 2004 – Rice University Stanley Gilbert.
Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture, 5e Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture, 5e Chapter 15: Incentive Compensation McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Asymmetric Information
Sunk Costs and Opportunity Costs Break Theory of the Firm Break Team Exercise BA 215 Agenda for Lecture 3.
The Production Game 1 Players: Principal, agent The Order of Play: The principal offers a wage rate, w The agent decides whether to accept of reject the.
Risk management in financial institutions Chapter 23.
Indifference curves Workers care about whether their job is safe or risky Utility = f (w,  ) where  risk of injury Indifference curves reveal the trade.
Ch 14 Agency. Principal-Agent Relationship Principal owns an asset Agent works on principal’s behalf to preserve on enhance the value of the asset Problem.
Game Theory “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So is a lot.” - Albert Einstein Topic 7 Information.
Principal - Agent Games. Sometimes asymmetric information develops after a contract has been signed In this case, signaling and screening do not help,
Semester 2, Seminar 7 – Contracting & Accounting Information Financial Accounting.
Imperfect Information: Quality Uncertainty and the Market for Lemons
Chapter 37 Asymmetric Information. Information in Competitive Markets In purely competitive markets all agents are fully informed about traded commodities.
Asymmetric Information
Prof. Dr. Friedrich Schneider Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre Recht und Ökonomie (Law and Economics) LVA-Nr.:
2 nd session: Principal – Agent Problem Performance Evaluation IMSc in Business Administration October-November 2008.
© Cumming & Johan (2013)Agency Problems Cumming & Johan (2013, Chapter 2) 1.
Managerial compensation in a two- level gift-exchange experiment Fernanda Rivas Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Nils Hesse Albert-Ludwigs Universität.
The Moral Hazard Problem Stefan P. Schleicher University of Graz
This slideshow was written by Ken Chapman, but is substantially based on concepts from Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture by Brickley.
Health Economics Unit Definition of Economics  Demand − relationship between quantities and prices that addresses how much bought at each price.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 7-1 Defining Competitiveness Chapter 7.
Seeking Alpha: Excess Risk Taking and Competition for Managerial Talent Acharya, Pagano and Volpin Comment Alan Schwartz.
Chapter 3 Arbitrage and Financial Decision Making
Economics of Strategy Slide show prepared by Richard PonArul California State University, Chico  John Wiley  Sons, Inc. Chapter 14 Agency and Performance.
Markets with Asymmetric Information
Chapter 5 Compensating Wage Differentials Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
© 2010 W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. 37 Asymmetric Information.
Asymmetric Information
MGRECON401 Economics of International Business and Multinationals LECTURE 7 Motivating Employees and Performance Evaluation in a Complex Organization.
Contracting The incentives of the employer (principal) and employee (agent) are different. A contract is designed to implement an outcome both parties.
Lecture 5 Financial Incentives This lecture is paired with our previous one that discussed employee benefits. Here we focus on the reasons why monetary.
ECO 340: Micro Theory Optimal Contracts Sami Dakhlia U. of Southern Mississippi
© 2010 Institute of Information Management National Chiao Tung University Chapter 7 Incentive Mechanism Principle-Agent Problem Production with Teams Competition.
1/35 1/28/2016 Fall 10 – 1 st Quarter Performance Evaluation 2 nd session: Principal – Agent Problem Performance Evaluation IMSc in.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 7-1 Defining Competitiveness Chapter 7.
This slideshow was written by Ken Chapman, but is substantially based on concepts from Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture by Brickley.
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy Chapter 6 The Organization of the Firm.
Private Health Insurance
AGENCY AND PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT. The Principal/Agent Framework Agency Problem/Agency Conflict : # Principal's objection is to maximize value its receive.
DADSS Lecture 3: Using Excel with Time Value Calculations John Gasper.
Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.20-1 Topics 1.The Principal-Agent Problem. 2.Using Contracts to Reduce Moral Hazard. 3.Monitoring.
Milgrom and Roberts (1992): Chapter 6 Economics, Organization & Management Chapter 6: Moral Hazard and Performance Incentives Examples of Moral Hazard:
Chapter Thirty-Six Asymmetric Information. Information in Competitive Markets u In purely competitive markets all agents are fully informed about traded.
Asymmetric Information
Information and its value
Heterogeneity One limitation of the static LS model lies in the heterogeneity assumption. In reality, individuals differ in preference and in information.
Markets with Asymmetric Information
Chapter Thirty-Three Law and Economics.
Moral Hazard.
Chapter 38 Asymmetric Information
Presentation transcript:

Moral hazard and contracts 1

Introduction Review Moral hazard The principal-agent problem Adverse Selection Signals Seperating equilibrium « Unobserved types » Moral hazard « Unobserved actions » The principal-agent problem Incentives and contracts

Moral hazard (and risk) Ex: You just bought theft insurance for your home. Do you install an alarm system? The tendency to be less careful when risks are eliminated is an example of moral hazard. Because insurance changes the costs of misfortune, and because people's choices depend on costs and benefits, insurance should change people's behavior. They should make less effort to avoid misfortune, and this change in behavior is called moral hazard.

Moral hazard (and management) When a manager has a secure position from which he or she cannot be readily removed. When a manager is protected by someone higher in the corporate structure. When funding and/or managerial status for a project is independent of the project's success. When the failure of the project is of minimal overall consequence to the firm, regardless of the local impact on the managed division. When there is no clear means of determining who is accountable for a given project.

Moral hazard (and finance) Bailout by the government creates a risk for moral hazard. Credit card users... CEO’s objectives vs. Shareholders ...

The principal-agent problem If your employer pays you a fixed monthly salary, are you motivated to work hard? Agent: person who acts (employee) Principal: party affected by the actions (employer) The problem comes from the fact that the principal cannot observe the effort level of the agent, only his performance.

Unfavorable context (50%) Example You are managing an employee in a watch factory. He can provide a level of effort which is low (e = 0) or high (e = 1). Both of you are risk-neutral. Uncertainty about demand. Firm’s revenue: Unfavorable context (50%) Favorable context (50%) Low effort (e = 0) R = 10 000 $ R = 20 000 $ High effort (e = 1) R = 40 000 $ Working hard costs him the equivalent of 10,000$.

If effort is observable If w(e=0) is your employee’s base salary, how must you choose w(e=1) to motivate him to work hard? Is it profitable for you?

If effort is observable If w(e=0) is your employee’s base salary, how must you choose w(e=1) to motivate him to work hard? w1 at least 10,000$ Is it profitable for you? ER(e=0)=0.5*10K$+0.5*20K$= 15K$ ER(e=1)=0.5*20K$+0.5*40K$-10K$ = 20K$

If only revenue is observable If you pay your employee a fixed salary (w(R) ≡ constant), which level of effort will he choose?

If only revenue is observable If you pay your employee a fixed salary (w(R) ≡ constant), which level of effort will he choose? On a constant salary, because effort is costly, his dominant strategy is to exert no effort because it only reduces his net benefit. (Moral hazard!)

Performance premium If you offer the following payment scheme: w(R) = $1,000 if R = $10,000 or $20,000 w(R) = $24,000 if R = $40,000 Which effort level will your employee choose? What will your (expected) profit be?

Performance premium Expected utility (net benefit): w(R) = 1 000 $ if R = 10 000 $ or 20 000 $ w(R) = 24 000 $ if R = 40 000 $ Unfavorable cntxt.(50%) Favorable cntxt. (50%) Low effort (e = 0) EU(R) = 1000 $ High effort (e = 1) EU(R) = 1K$-10K$ = -9K$ EU(R) = 24K$ -10K$ = 14K$ Because the agent is risk-neutral, he picks the effort level that maximizes his expected net-beneft. EU(e=1)=(14000-9000)/2=2500$ > EU(e=0)=1000$

Performance premium Expected Profits: R-W(R) Unfavorable cntxt.(50%) Favorable cntxt. (50%) Low effort (e = 0) 10K$-1K$=9K$ 20K$-1K$=19K$ High effort (e = 1) 40K$-24K$=16K$ π(e=0) = 50%*9K$ + 50%*19K$=14K$ π(e=1) = 50%*19K$ + 50%*16K$=17.5K$ We can expect profits of 17,500$ because the agent should exert a high effort.

Revenue sharing If you use the following payment schedule w(R) = R – $18,000 if R > $18,000 w(R) = $1,000 otherwise What will your employee’s expected net benefit be if he exerts low effort? What will his net benefit be if he exerts high effort? What will he choose? What will your expected(?) profit be?

Revenue sharing If you use the following payment schedule: w(R) = R – 18 000 $ if R > 18 000 $ w(R) = 1 000 $ otherwise Unfavorable cntxt.(50%) Favorable cntxt. (50%) Low effort (e = 0) EU(R) = 1000 $ EU(R) = 2000 $ High effort (e = 1) EU(R) = 2K$-10K$ = -8K$ EU(R) = 22K$-10K$ =12K$ Here too, high effort is the worker’s dominant strategy. EU(e=1)=2K$ > EU(e=0)=1.5K$

Revenue sharing Expected profits: R-W(R) Unfavorable cntxt.(50%) Favorable cntxt. (50%) Low effort (e = 0) 10K$-1K$=9K$ 20K$-2K$=18K$ High effort (e = 1) 40K$-22K$=18K$ π(e=0) = 50%*9K$ + 50%*18K$=13.5K$ π(e=1) = 50%*18K$ + 50%*18K$=18K$ We can expect profits of 18,000$ if the agent exerts a high effort.

Conclusions Our environment has an impact on our behavior  incentives matter! Next: final exam 

Exercise 10 As Chairman of the Board of ASP Industries you estimate that your firm’s annual profit is given by the table below. Profit () is conditional upon market demand and the effort of your new CEO. The probabilities of each demand condition occurring are also shown in the table. Market Demand Low Demand Medium Demand High Demand Market Probabilities .30 .40 Low Effort =$5 million =$10 million =$15 million High Effort =$17 million

Exercise 10 You must design a compensation package for the CEO that will maximize the firm’s expected profit. While the firm is risk neutral, the CEO is risk averse. The CEO’s utility function is: Utility = W½ when making low effort Utility = W½ -100, when making high effort, where W is the CEO’s income. (The -100 is the “utility cost” to the CEO of making a high effort.) You know the CEO’s utility function, and both you and the CEO know all of the information in the preceding table. You do not know the level of the CEO’s effort at time of compensation or the exact state of demand. You do see the firm’s profit, however.

Exercise 10 Of the three alternative compensation packages below, which do you as Chairman of ASP Industries prefer and why? PACKAGE 1: Pay the CEO a flat salary of $575,000 per year. PACKAGE 2: Pay the CEO a fixed 6 percent of yearly firm profits. PACKAGE 3: Pay the CEO a flat salary of $500,000 per year and then 50 percent of any firm profits above $15 million.

Exercise 11 A firm’s short-run revenue is given by: R = 10e – e² where e is the level of effort by a typical worker (all workers are assumed to be identical). A worker chooses his level of effort to maximize his wage net of effort (the per-unit cost of effort is assumed to be 1). U = w - e

Exercise 11 Determine the level of effort and the level of profit (revenue less wage paid) for each of the following wage arrangements. Explain why these differing principal-agent relationships generate different outcomes. w = 2 for e  1; otherwise w = 0. w = R/2 w = R - 12.5