Socially Optimal Coordination: Characterization and Policy Implications

In recent years there has been a growing interest in macro models with heterogeneity in information and complementarity in actions. These models deliver promising positive properties, such as heightened inertia and volatility. But they also raise important normative questions, such as whether the heightened inertia and volatility are socially undesirable, whether there is room for policies that correct the way agents use information in equilibrium, and what are the welfare effects of the information disseminated by the media or policy makers. We argue that a key to answering all these questions is the relation between the equilibrium and the socially optimal degrees of coordination. The former summarizes the private value from aligning individual decisions, whereas the latter summarizes the value that society assigns to such an alignment once all externalities are internalized.Dispersed information, coordination, complementarities, volatility, inertia, efficiency

A Calibratable Model of Optimal CEO Incentives in Market Equilibrium

This paper presents a unified framework for understanding the determinants of both CEO incentives and total pay levels in competitive market equilibrium. It embeds a modified principal-agent problem into a talent assignment model to endogenize both elements of compensation. The model's closed form solutions yield testable predictions for how incentives should vary across firms under optimal contracting. In particular, our calibrations show that the negative relationship between the CEO's effective equity stake and firm size is quantitatively consistent with efficiency and need not reflect rent extraction. Our model and data both also imply that the dollar change in wealth for a percentage change in firm value, scaled by annual pay, is independent of firm size. This may render it an attractive incentive measure as it is comparable between firms and over time. The theory also predicts a positive relationship between pay volatility and firm volatility, and that risk and effort affect total pay along the cross-section but not in the aggregate. Finally, we demonstrate that incentive compensation is effective at solving large agency problems, such as selecting corporate strategy, but smaller issues such as perk consumption are best addressed through direct monitoring.

Essays on the economic theory of managerial incentives

Corporations are very common in the business world. In this kind of organizations shareholders are protected by limited liability and, furthermore, they can easily transfer their shares. As a consequence, investors might be interested in buying a corporation's shares just to diversify their portfolios, without any real interest in getting involved in management. It is therefore much easier for corporations to obtain external finance than other organizational forms, and this might well be the basic reason for their wide diffusion. For the very same reason, however, it is necessary to hire professional managers to make all the relevant decisions, and this contains the seed of their problematic governance. In fact, the separation of ownership and control produces a conflict of interest between shareholders, interested in maximizing the firm value, and managers, who can be interested in pursuing a variety of different objectives (empire building, entrenchment, shirking, etc.). This dissertation is composed by three research papers dealing with the economics of managerial incentive provision. It is common to interpret the relationship between shareholders and managers as an agency relationship affected by both a moral hazard and adverse selection problem. Usually, managerial incentives are affected by several elements such as, for example, their compensation packages and career concerns, the internal monitoring of the board of directors, the external monitoring of the market for corporate control, etc. This dissertation suggests that it might be necessary to consider Overview 2 the interactions between alternative incentive mechanisms both to better understand their functioning and, at least as importantly, to help interpreting empirical observations. The first chapter, Paying for Observable Luck, proposes a simple hidden action model which explains recent empirical evidence of asymmetric benchmarking in managerial compensation: managers appear to be insulated from bad luck but not from good luck. The explanation hinges on the interaction between explicit contractual incentives and implicit incentives deriving from the possibility of bankruptcy. The second chapter, Career Concerns and Competitive Pressure, studies how the level of competition in the product market a ects the strength of managerial career concerns. Good managers are in short supply so that firms are willing to compete for them. However, the value of good managers depends on the profit differential they are able to produce on the product market. It is then shown that increased competition makes career concerns stronger if it increases such profit differential. The third chapter, Managerial Entrenchment and the Market for CEOs, suggests that the observed trends of increased managerial pay and increased board independence might be related. Boards captured by an entrenched managers are not active on the demand side of the managerial labor market. Therefore, increased board independence, reducing the number of captured boards, also increases competition for good managers, then rising their pay and making their career concerns stronger

Stock Options and Chief Executive Compensation

Although stock options are commonly observed in chief executive officer (CEO) com- pensation contracts, there is theoretical controversy about whether stock options are part of the optimal contract. Using a sample of Fortune 500 companies, we solve an agency model calibrated to the company-specifc data and we find that stock options are almost always part of the optimal contract. This result is robust to alternative assumptions about the level of CEO risk-aversion and the disutility associated with their effort. In a supplementary analysis, we solve for the optimal contract when there are no restrictions on the contract space. We find that the optimal contract (which is characterized as a state-contingent payoff to the CEO) typically has option-like features over the most probable range of outcomes.Stock Options, Incentives, Agency Model

Executive equity compensation and incentives: a survey

Stock and option compensation and the level of managerial equity incentives are aspects of corporate governance that are especially controversial to shareholders, institutional activists, and government regulators. Similar to much of the corporate finance and corporate governance literature, research on stock-based compensation and incentives has not only generated useful insights, but also produced many contradictory findings. Not surprisingly, many fundamental questions remain unanswered. In this study, the authors synthesize the broad literature on equity-based compensation and executive incentives and highlight topics that seem especially appropriate for future research.Executives ; Stockholders ; Corporate governance

On the Objective of Corporate Boards: Theory and Evidence

Abstract: There are two views on board objectives: (i) boards act as monitors with the objective to maximize firms' long-term fundamental values; and (ii) boards act myopically with a focus on firms' short-term market values. We propose a principal-agent model linking CEO incentive pay to earnings overstatement that allows us to differentiate between these objectives empirically. In response to an increase in the cost of overstating earnings, the model predicts an increase in CEO incentives if boards act as monitors, but a decrease in CEO incentives if boards are myopic. We find strong evidence of a decrease in CEO incentives around the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Moreover, the model predicts that capital market pressure makes boards more myopic. We document a positive relationship between capital market pressure and CEO incentives. Around SOX, CEO incentives also fall by more in firms with high capital market pressure, as predicted by the model. Our results strongly support the myopic board view.

Capital Structure and Managerial Compensation: The Effects of Renumeration Seniority

We show that the relative seniority of debt and managerial compensation has important implications on the design of remuneration contracts.Whereas the traditional literature assumes that debt is senior to remuneration, we show that this is frequently not the case according to bankruptcy regulation and as observed in practice.We theoretically show that including risky debt changes the incentive to provide the manager with stronger performance-related incentives ("contract substitution" effect).If managerial compensation has priority over the debt claims, higher leverage produces lower powerincentive schemes (lower bonuses) and a higher base salary.With junior compensation, we expect more emphasis on pay-for-performance incentives.The empirical findings are in line with the regime of remuneration seniority as the base salary is significantly higher and the performance bonus is lower in financially distressed firms. Series: CentER Discussion Paperseniority of claims;remuneration contracts;financial distress;insolvency;leverage

Dynamic Managerial Compensation: a Mechanism Design Approach

We characterize the optimal incentive scheme for a manager who faces costly effort decisions and whose ability to generate profits for the firm varies stochastically over time. The optimal contract is obtained as the solution to a dynamic mechanism design problem with hidden actions and persistent shocks to the agent's productivity. When the agent is risk-neutral, the optimal contract can often be implemented with a simple pay package that is linear in the firm's profits. Furthermore, the power of the incentive scheme typically increases over time, thus providing a possible justification for the frequent practice of putting more stocks and options in the package of managers with a longer tenure in the firm. In contrast to other explanations proposed in the literature (e.g., declining disutility of effort or career concerns), the optimality of seniority-based reward schemes is not driven by variations in the agent's preferences or in his outside option. It results from an optimal allocation of the manager's informational rents over time. Building on the insights from the risk-neutral case, we then explore the properties of optimal incentive schemes for risk-averse managers. We find that, other things equal, risk-aversion reduces the benefit of inducing higher effort over time. Whether (risk-averse) managers with a longer tenure receive more or less high-powered incentives than younger ones then depends on the interaction between the degree of risk aversion and the dynamics of the impulse responses for the shocks to the manager's type.dynamic mechanism design; adverse selection; moral hazard; incentives; optimal pay scheme; risk-aversion; stochastic process