Integrating Variable Risk Preferences, Trust, and Transaction Cost Economics

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd H. Chiles ◽  
John F. McMackin
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Risk Preferences

Risk Preferences and Asset Ownership: Integrating Prospect Theory and Transaction Cost Economics

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksey Martynov ◽  
Donald J. Schepker
Keyword(s):  
Prospect Theory ◽  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Risk Preferences ◽  
Asset Ownership

Integrating Variable Risk Preferences, Trust, and Transaction Cost Economics

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd H. Chiles ◽  
John F. McMackin
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Risk Preferences

scholarly journals Integrating variable risk preferences, trust, and transaction cost economics – 25 years on: reflections in memory of Oliver Williamson

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
John F. McMackin ◽  
Todd H. Chiles ◽  
Long W. Lam
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Risk Preferences ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Management Review ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Social

Abstract In this essay, we honour the memory of Oliver Williamson by reflecting on Chiles and McMackin's 1996 Academy of Management Review article ‘Integrating variable risk preferences, trust, and transaction cost economics’. The article, which built on Williamson's work in transaction cost economics (TCE), went on to attract attention not only from the authors’ home discipline of management and organisation studies, but also from other business disciplines, the professions and the social sciences. After revisiting the article's origins and core arguments, we turn to selectively (re)view TCE's development since 1996 through the lens of this article, focusing on trust, risk and subjective costs. We cover conceptual and empirical developments in each of these areas and reflect on how our review contributes to previous debates concerning trade-offs implicit in relaxing TCE's behavioural assumptions. We conclude by reflecting on key points of learning from our review and possible implications for future research.

From transaction costs to transaction value: Overcoming the frictional paradigm

2020 ◽  
pp. 51-81
Author(s):  
D. P. Frolov
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Path Dependence ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Cost Minimization ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Coase Theorem ◽  
Transactional Analysis ◽  
Transaction Sector ◽  
Transaction Value

The transaction cost economics has accumulated a mass of dogmatic concepts and assertions that have acquired high stability under the influence of path dependence. These include the dogma about transaction costs as frictions, the dogma about the unproductiveness of transactions as a generator of losses, “Stigler—Coase” theorem and the logic of transaction cost minimization, and also the dogma about the priority of institutions providing low-cost transactions. The listed dogmas underlie the prevailing tradition of transactional analysis the frictional paradigm — which, in turn, is the foundation of neo-institutional theory. Therefore, the community of new institutionalists implicitly blocks attempts of a serious revision of this dogmatics. The purpose of the article is to substantiate a post-institutional (alternative to the dominant neo-institutional discourse) value-oriented perspective for the development of transactional studies based on rethinking and combining forgotten theoretical alternatives. Those are Commons’s theory of transactions, Wallis—North’s theory of transaction sector, theory of transaction benefits (T. Sandler, N. Komesar, T. Eggertsson) and Zajac—Olsen’s theory of transaction value. The article provides arguments and examples in favor of broader explanatory possibilities of value-oriented transactional analysis.

Governance of supplier-customer relations: An empirical review

2007 ◽  
Vol 158 (12) ◽  
pp. 406-416
Author(s):  
Jon Bingen Sande
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Customer Relations ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Exchange Theory ◽  
Forest Industry ◽  
Relational Contracts ◽  
Relational Exchange ◽  
Exchange Relationships ◽  
Relational Exchange Theory

The forest industry is riddled with exchange relationships. The parties to exchanges may have diverging goals and interests, but still depend upon each other due to non-redeployable specific assets. Formal and relational contracts may be used to deal with the resulting cooperation problems. This paper proposes a framework based on transaction cost economics and relational exchange theory, and examines to what extent empirical research has found formal and relational contracts to deal with three different governance problems. To that end, I review the results from 32 studies in a range of settings. These studies generally support the view that exchanges characterized by high degrees of specific assets should be supported by formal and relational contracts.

Why transaction cost economics needs evolutionary economics

1994 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolai J. Foss
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Evolutionary Economics

Regime Type and FDI: A Transaction Cost Economics Approach to the Debate

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Austin P Johnson ◽  
Quan Li
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Regime Type
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document