Of key importance in the governance structure of firms is the role of financial incentives for each major player. The main contribution of this article is an analysis of how an insider's concentration of wealth in his or her bank investment affects incentives to take risk. Major empirical findings are that, first, bank earnings variation falls when bank managers have more of their wealth concentrated in their banks; second, hired-manager banks become less risky when a person who has significant motivation to monitor bank management has his or her wealth highly concentrated in the bank; and third, stock ownership by hired managers can increase total risk of a bank. Further analysis suggests that community banks in our sample control earnings variation by manipulating idiosyncratic risk, credit risk, and leverage but not systematic risk or the loan-to-asset ratio.

Small, closely held corporations must rely disproportionately on managerial shareholdings to mitigate the agency costs associated with hired managers, because market discipline and motivated outside monitors are typically absent for such firms. We study a random sample of 266 small, closely held US commercial banks with a broad range of ownership and management arrangements. Our results suggest that hiring an outside manager can improve profitability, but these gains depend on aligning hired managers with owners via managerial shareholdings. We find that over-utilizing this control mechanism results in entrenchment, while under-utilization is costly in terms of foregone profits.