Preemption games are widely used to model economic problems such as patent races. We introduce private information into these games and allow for this information to stochastically change over time. This reflects, e.g. how R&D competitors improve their innovations over time and keep these innovations secret before patenting them. The analysis initially appears intractable because of the complexity of the equilibrium updating of beliefs on opponents' information. However, we demonstrate the existence of a class of equilibria and calculate these equilibria in closed form. We find that the expected durations in these equilibria are longer than when players' information is public but, in some cases, shorter than in the collusive outcome. Hence, R&D secrecy slows down innovation disclosure.

This paper examines the Faustian dynamics of policy and power. We posit a general class of dynamic games in which current policies affect the future distribution of political power, resulting in the following “Faustian trade-off”: if the current ruler chooses his preferred policy, he then sacrifices future political power; yet if he wants to preserve his future power, he must sacrifice his present policy objectives. The trade-off comes from the fact that the current political ruler/pivotal voter cannot uncouple the direct effect of his policy from its indirect effect on future power. A policy-endogenous (PE) equilibrium describes this endogenous transfer of power and the resulting evolution of policy and political power over time. We show that the Faustian trade-off in a PE equilibrium is decomposed into two basic rationales. The political preservation effect induces more tempered policy choices than if one's policy choice did not affect one's political fortunes. However, the reformation effect induces “more aggressive” policies in order to exploit the productivity gains from policies chosen by even more aggressive successors. We distinguish between political systems that give rise to monotone Faustian dynamics—political power that progressively evolves towards more fiscally liberal types of leaders—and cyclical Faustian dynamics—political power that oscillates between liberal and conservative types of leaders. In each case, we show that the Faustian trade-off moderates the choices of each type of leader.

The incentive and project selection effects of agent anonymity are investigated in a setting where an evaluator observes a subjective signal of project quality. Although the evaluator cannot commit ex ante to an acceptance criterion, she decides up front between informed review , where the agent's ability is directly observable, or blind review , where it is not. An ideal acceptance criterion balances the goals of incentive provision and project selection. Relative to this, informed review results in an excessively steep equilibrium acceptance policy: the standard applied to low-ability agents is too stringent and the standard applied to high-ability agents is too lenient. Blind review, in which all types face the same standard, often provides better incentives, but it ignores valuable information for selecting projects. The evaluator prefers a policy of blind (respectively informed) review when the ability distribution puts more weight on high (respectively low) types, the agent's pay-off from acceptance is high (respectively low), or the quality signal is precise (respectively imprecise). Applications discussed include the admissibility of character evidence in criminal trials and academic refereeing.

[We explore whether central bank intervention improves liquidity in the interbank market during the current subprime crisis with unique trade and quote data from the e-MID, the only regulated electronic interbank market in the world. Central bank intervention consistently creates greater uncertainty in the interbank market. Prior to the crisis, the cover-to-bid ratio effectively conveys good and bad news from the central bank, but this link is broken during the crisis, suggesting that standard (and special) interventions that do not specifically target interbank asymmetric information fail to improve market liquidity. Our results suggest that the central bank should release stress tests for individual banks, provide interbank loan guarantees, or engage in direct asset purchases rather than simply providing more capital when counterparty risk poses systemic risk to the interbank market.]

[We document market anticipation of merger bids and show that less anticipated bids earn significantly higher announcement returns. Subsequent bidders in the industry experience significant and positive abnormal returns around the time of initial industry bid announcements. These results suggest that announcement period returns underestimate the wealth effects of bidding. After accounting for anticipation, bidding activity is, on average, a significant wealth-creating event. Moreover, bidders pursuing public targets increase shareholder wealth and bidders in stock swaps do not lose. These results contradict conventional wisdom. Our results shed light on the correct magnitude of acquisition returns and on the transfer of information throughout an industry around the time of an economic shock.]

[We investigate corporate governance experts' claim that it is detrimental to a firm to reappoint former CEOs as directors after they step down as CEOs. We find that more successful and more powerful former CEOs are more likely to be reappointed to the board multiple times after they step down as CEOs. Firms benefit, on average, from the presence of former CEOs on their boards. Firms with former CEO directors have better accounting performance, have higher relative turnover-performance sensitivity of the successor CEO, and can rehire their former CEO directors as CEOs after extremely poor firm performance under the successor CEOs.]

We examine the influence of normative and regulative institutional factors on cost shifting by nonprofit hospitals in their publicly reported statements. We explore whether normative constraints imposed by stakeholders, who prefer that nonprofit hospitals allocate their resources toward patient-related program services, influence the extent to which nonprofit hospitals shift costs toward program services and away from administrative and fundraising categories, thereby appearing more efficient. We also explore whether regulative factors, such as oversight, influence cost shifting behaviors. Results indicate that nonprofit hospitals facing higher normative pressures to demonstrate efficiency shift costs to a greater extent, and hospitals facing higher regulatory oversight shift costs to a lesser extent. Consistent with prior research, we also find that hospitals that obtain higher donations revenue shift costs to a greater extent. Our results show that, in addition to economic factors documented by prior literature, institutional factors also influence nonprofit hospitals’ cost shifting behaviors.

There are important organizational and behavioral differences between firms in emerging markets and those in developed markets. We propose a top-down approach to understand how key institutional forces shape the structures and policies of firms in emerging markets. We review a selective set of prior studies as well as papers included in this Special Issue in identifying government quality, state ownership, and financial development as critical institutional forces that shape the financing and governance of firms in emerging markets. We suggest that future research should pay attention to several important but unanswered topics related to informal enforcement, government incentives, family firms, and network organizations.

We analyze a firm's choice between spin-offs, equity carve-outs, and tracking stock issues and the role of institutional investors in corporate restructuring. We model a firm with two divisions. Insiders have private information about firm value and face an equity market with retail and institutional investors. We show that restructuring increases information production by institutional investors (relative to that about the consolidated firm): the highest increase in information production arises from spin-offs, the next highest from carve-outs, and the lowest from tracking stock issues. Insiders with the most favorable private information implement spin-offs; those with less favorable private information implement carve-outs; those with even less favorable private information implement tracking stock issues; and those with unfavorable private information remain consolidated. We explain the positive announcement effect and increase in analyst coverage associated with all three forms of restructuring. Our model also generates a number of novel testable predictions for firms' choice between spin-offs, carve-outs, and tracking stock issues, and for institutional trading around these three forms of restructuring.