Disclosure and Secrecy in Employee Monitoring

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 187-208
Author(s):  
Mitchell A. Farlee

ABSTRACT: Disclosure and monitoring policy are studied, where disclosure relates to information about the monitoring system. A moral hazard model is presented where employee monitoring occurs with some exogenous probability and the owner privately learns whether he will be monitoring before the employee chooses his productive action. Disclosure policy is an owner choice between revealing to the employee whether he will be monitoring before the action (Disclosure) or remaining silent (Secrecy). The results rely on the joint presence of risk aversion and limited liability. Risk aversion creates an efficiency/risk tradeoff where secrecy obtains risk-sharing benefits. Limited liability reduces these benefits, allowing preference for disclosure. Lower monitoring probabilities increase the risk premium required to obtain effort with secrecy. For small monitoring probabilities, disclosure is preferred even though less efficient production is achieved, because disclosure provides a greater risk-sharing benefit. For high monitoring probabilities, secrecy is preferred because it leads to greater efficiency despite a greater risk premium.

1995 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
John J. Cheh ◽  
Tae-Young Paik

This paper investigates the optimal performance evaluation scheme of a supervisor who monitors a worker in a setting where the worker can collude with the supervisor. We study the setting where the supervisor's incentive problem results from collusion, not from work aversion. In the owner-supervisor-worker structure, the supervisor monitors the worker's effort and reports to the owner. The owner evaluates the worker based on the supervisor's report and imposes less risk on the worker, saving the risk premium to him. To prevent collusion between the supervisor and the worker, the owner must hold the supervisor responsible for the worker's performance, paying risk premium to the supervisor. Examples show that the owner prefers the owner-supervisor-worker structure to the owner-worker structure when the worker is very risk averse relative to the supervisor. Examples also show that if the supervisor and the worker can make side transfers for risk sharing as well as for collusion, the owner might prefer the owner-supervisor-worker structure only when the supervisor's risk aversion is neither too great nor too small. When the supervisor is close to risk neutral, either his limited liability or high reservation utility makes it too costly to hire him. The subcontracting structure where the supervisor is delegated to contract with the worker is shown to be performance equivalent to the owner-supervisor-worker structure. In the subcontracting, the supervisor's direct control on the worker's compensation plays the same role that the supervisor's report does in the three-tier hierarchy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 92 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Baldenius ◽  
Beatrice Michaeli

ABSTRACT We demonstrate a novel link between relationship-specific investments and risk in a setting where division managers operate under moral hazard and collaborate on joint projects. Specific investments increase efficiency at the margin. This expands the scale of operations and thereby adds to the compensation risk borne by the managers. Accounting for this investment/risk link overturns key findings from prior incomplete contracting studies. We find that if the investing manager has full bargaining power vis-à-vis the other manager, he will underinvest relative to the benchmark of contractible investments; with equal bargaining power, however, he may overinvest. The reason is that the investing manager internalizes only his own share of the investment-induced risk premium (we label this a “risk transfer”), whereas the principal internalizes both managers' incremental risk premia. We show that high pay-performance sensitivity (PPS) reduces the managers' incentives to invest in relationship-specific assets. The optimal PPS, thus, trades off investment and effort incentives.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1105 (1) ◽  
pp. 012037
Author(s):  
Taha E Al-jarakh ◽  
Osama A Hussein ◽  
Alaa K Al-azzawi ◽  
Mahmood F Mosleh

Author(s):  
Bruno Biais ◽  
Florian Heider ◽  
Marie Hoerova

Abstract In order to share risk, protection buyers trade derivatives with protection sellers. Protection sellers’ actions affect the riskiness of their assets, which can create counterparty risk. Because these actions are unobservable, moral hazard limits risk sharing. To mitigate this problem, privately optimal derivative contracts involve variation margins. When margins are called, protection sellers must liquidate some assets, depressing asset prices. This tightens the incentive constraints of other protection sellers and reduces their ability to provide insurance. Despite this fire-sale externality, equilibrium is information-constrained efficient. Investors, who benefit from buying assets at fire-sale prices, optimally supply insurance against the risk of fire sales.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document