Contract Choice: Efficiency and Fairness in Revenue‐Sharing Contracts
- 6 September 2017
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in The Scandinavian Journal of Economics
- Vol. 119 (4) , 962-986
Abstract
We present a simple principal–agent experiment in which the principals are allowed to choose between a revenue‐sharing, a bonus, and a trust contract, to offer to an agent. Our findings suggest that a large majority of experimental subjects choose the revenue‐sharing contract. This choice turns out to be not only the most efficient but also, at the same time, fair. Overall, the distribution of earnings is only mildly skewed towards the principal. We conclude that, under revenue‐sharing contracts, concerns for fairness can be closely associated with the use of monetary incentives.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- On the incentive effects of monitoring: evidence from the lab and the fieldExperimental Economics, 2011
- Fairness and the Optimal Allocation of Ownership RightsThe Economic Journal, 2008
- TRUST GAMES, THE MORAL OF THE STORYPacific Economic Review, 2006
- Fairness and Incentives in a Multi‐task Principal–Agent ModelThe Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 2004
- Competitive balance and gate revenue sharing in team sportsThe Journal of Industrial Economics, 2004
- The Professional Partnership: Relic or Exemplary Form of Governance?Organization Studies, 2003
- Intrinsic Motivation and Optimal Incentive ContractsThe RAND Journal of Economics, 2002
- Revenue Sharing and Vertical Control in the Video Rental IndustryThe Journal of Industrial Economics, 2001
- Efficiency by trust in fairness? multiperiod ultimatum bargaining experiments with an increasing cakeInternational Journal of Game Theory, 1993
- Contract Choice in Modern Agriculture: Cash Rent versus CropshareThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1992