We consider optimal capital allocation and managerial compensation mechanisms for decentralized firms when division managers have an incentive to misrepresent project quality and to minimize privately costly but value-enhancing effort. We show that in the optimal mechanism firms always underinvest in capital relative to a naive application of the net present value (NPV) rule. We make a number of novel cross-sectional predictions about the severity of the underinvestment problem and the composition of managerial compensation contracts. We also find that firms will optimally give greater performance-based pay (at the expense of fixed wages) to managers of higher quality projects to mitigate the incentive for managers to overstate project quality. Managers may thus receive greater performance-based pay because they manage higher quality projects, not that greater performance-based pay causes firm value to increase.

[We examine the problem of motivating privately informed managers to engage in entrepreneurial activity to improve the quality of the firm's investment opportunities. The firm's investment and compensation policy must balance the manager's incentives to provide entrepreneurial effort and to report private information truthfully. The optimal policy is to underinvest (compared to first-best) and provide weak incentive pay in low-quality projects and overinvest (compared to first-best) and provide strong incentive pay in highquality projects.]

We examine the problem of motivating privately informed managers to engage in entrepreneurial activity to improve the quality of the firm's investment opportunities. The firm's investment and compensation policy must balance the manager's incentives to provide entrepreneurial effort and to report private information truthfully. The optimal policy is to underinvest (compared to first-best) and provide weak incentive pay in low-quality projects and overinvest (compared to first-best) and provide strong incentive pay in high-quality projects.

We examine optimal capital allocation and managerial compensation in a firm with two investment projects (divisions) each run by a risk-neutral manager who can provide (i) (unverifiable) information about project quality and (ii) (unverifiable) access to value-enhancing, but privately costly resources. The optimal managerial compensation contract offers greater performance pay and a lower salary when managers report that their project is higher quality. The firm generally underinvests in capital and managers underutilize resources (relative to first-best). We also derive cross-sectional predictions about the sensitivity of investment in one division to the quality of investment opportunities in the other division, and the relative importance of division-level and firm-level performance-based pay in managerial compensation contracts.

We examine optimal capital allocation and managerial compensation in a firm with two investment projects (divisions) each run by a risk-neutral manager who can provide (i) (unverifiable) information about project quality and (ii) (unverifiable) access to value-enhancing, but privately costly resources. The optimal managerial compensation contract offers greater performance pay and a lower salary when managers report that their project is higher quality. The firm generally underinvests in capital and managers underutilize resources (relative to first-best). We also derive cross-sectional predictions about the sensitivity of investment in one division to the quality of investment opportunities in the other division, and the relative importance of division-level and firm-level performance-based pay in managerial compensation contracts.

Does Competition for Capital Discipline Governments? Decentralization, Globalization, and Public Policy by Hongbin Cai and Daniel Treisman. Published in volume 95, issue 3, pages 817-830 of American Economic Review, June 2005

We report results from a randomized natural field experiment conducted in a restaurant dining setting to distinguish the observational learning effect from the saliency effect. We find that, when customers are given ranking information of the five most popular dishes, the demand for those dishes increases by 13 to 20 percent. We do not find a significant saliency effect. We also find modest evidence that the observational learning effects are stronger among infrequent customers, and that dining satisfaction is increased when customers are presented with the information of the top five dishes, but not when presented with only names of some sample dishes. (JEL C93, D83).

We report results from a large, randomized field to study how access to formal microinsurance affects production and economic development. We induce exogenous variation in insurance coverage at the village level by randomly assigning performance incentives to the village animal husbandry worker who is responsible for signing farmers up for the insurance. We find that promoting greater adoption of insurance significantly increases farmers' sow production, and this effect seems to persist in the longer run; moreover, the increase in sow production in response to the sow insurance does not seem to be the result of the substitution of other livestock.

Analyzing data from a unique survey of managers of Chinese private firms, we investigate how family ties with firm heads affect managerial compensation and job assignment. We find that family managers earn higher salaries and receive more bonuses, hold higher positions, and are given more decision rights and job responsibilities than nonfamily managers in the same firm. However, family managers face weaker incentives than professional managers, as seen in the lower sensitivity of their bonuses to firm performance. Our findings are consistent with the predictions of a principal-agent model that incorporates family trust and endogenous job assignment decisions.