We argue that job performance appraisal is an agency problem between a manager and his employees featuring asymmetric transfer values: Ratings given by the manager are money equivalent for the employees but only partially so for the manager. The asymmetry assumption is based on evidence that managers are not held fully accountable for payroll expense incurred, which, we argue, stems from the misalignment of managerial compensation with the profits of the firm. Other evidence also shows that the problem of managerial unaccountability is more aggravated in larger firms. In this paper, we develop a nested agency model of economic organization of a firm with unaccountable managers, which in equilibrium obtains the firm-size wage effects the large-firm wage premium and inverse relationship between firm size and wage dispersion. We also relate and explain the compression of ratings phenomenon from literature on organizational psychology.
Recent immigrants in Switzerland are overrepresented at the top of the wage distribution in high and at the bottom in low skill occupations. Basic economic theory thus suggests that immigration has led to a compression of the wage distribution in the former group and to an expansion in the latter. The data confirm this proposition for high skill occupations, but reveal effects close to zero for low skill occupations. While the estimated wage effects are of considerable magnitude at the tails of the wage distribution in high skill occupations, the effects on overall inequality are shown to be negligible.
We consider a standard social choice environment with linear utilities and independent, one-dimensional, private values. We provide a short and constructive proof that for any Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism there exists an equivalent dominant strategy incentive compatible mechanism that delivers the same interim expected utilities for all agents. We demonstrate the usefulness and applicability of our approach with several examples. Finally, we show that the equivalence between Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation breaks down when utilities are non-linear or when values are interdependent, multi-dimensional, or correlated.
This paper calculates the impact of Active Labour Market Programmes through the use of three new indicators measuring the application performance of the unemployed. These indicators can be measured repeatedly and therefore allow the usage of Panel Regression methods, cancelling out any unobserved individual heterogeneity. To implement the new approach, data on 30,000 applications has been collected. Using this data, a large positive effect for unemployed with a long term unemployment forecast was estimated. For unemployed without such a forecast, the effect is much smaller. The paper also shows that the new evaluation approach fulfils the requirements of a good controlling instrument: It is accurate, detailed, non-intrusive, inexpensive and therefore easy to keep up to date, easy to understand and communicate.
