We study information flows in an organization with a top management (principal) and multiple subunits (agents) with private information that determines the organization's overall efficiency. Under centralized communication, eliciting the agents' information may induce the principal to manipulate aggregate information, which obstructs an effective use of information. Under hierarchical communication, the principal concedes more information rent due to loss of control, but is able to use the agents' information more effectively. The trade‐off between the organizational structures depends on the likelihood that the agents are efficient. Centralized communication is optimal when such likelihood is low. Hierarchical communication, by contrast, is optimal when it is high.

We study contracting between a public good provider and users with private valuations of the good. We show that, once the provider extracts the users' private information, she benefits from manipulating the collective information received from all users when communicating with them. We derive conditions under which such manipulation determines the direction of distortions in public good provision. If the provider is non‐manipulative, the public good is always underprovided, whereas overprovision occurs with a manipulative provider. With overprovision, not only high‐valuation users, but also low‐valuation users may obtain positive rents—users may prefer facing a manipulative provider.

We study sealed-bid second-price auctions with costly participation and resale. Each bidder chooses to participate in the auction if her valuation is higher than her optimally chosen participation cutoff. If resale is not allowed and the bidder valuations are drawn from a strictly convex distribution function, the symmetric equilibrium (where all bidders use the same cutoff) is less efficient than a class of two-cutoffa symmetric equilibria. Existence of these equilibria without resale is sufficient for existence of similarly constructed two-cutoff equilibria with resale. Moreover, the equilibria with resale are "more asymmetric" and (under a sufficient condition) more efficient than the corresponding equilibria without resale. (c) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

We study an incomplete information game in which players are involved in a reciprocal relationship that allows them to coordinate their actions by contracting among themselves. We model this as a competing mechanism game in which players have the ability to write contracts. We characterize the set of outcome functions that can be supported as equilibrium in this enhanced game. We use our characterization to show that the set of supportable outcomes is bigger than the set of outcomes supported by a centralized mechanism designer who can offer mechanisms in which all players participate. The difference is that the contracting game makes it possible for players to convey partial information about their type at the time they offer contracts.

We investigate the feasibility of implementing an allocation rule with a gradual-revelation mechanism in which agents reveal their private information over time (rather than all at once). With independently distributed types, private values, and transferable utilities satisfying a single-crossing property, an ex-post monotonicity condition is sufficient for budget-balanced implementation of any incentive-compatible allocation rule with any gradual-revelation scheme. When we extend the single-crossing property over the set of randomized allocations, a weaker monotonicity condition is necessary and sufficient for budget-balanced implementation by gradual revelation.

Under appropriate assumptions (private values and uniform punishments), the Nash equilibria of a Bayesian repeated game without discounting are payoff-equivalent to tractable, completely revealing, equilibria and can be achieved as interim cooperative solutions of the initial Bayesian game. This characterization does not apply to discounted games with patient players. In a class of public good games, the set of Nash equilibrium payoffs of the undiscounted game can be empty, while limit (perfect Bayesian) Nash equilibrium payoffs of the discounted game, as players become infinitely patient, do exist. These equilibria share some features with the ones of multi-sided reputation models. JEL-Code: C730, C720, C710, D820, H410.

We study a mechanism design problem in which players can take part in a mechanism to coordinate their actions in a default game. By refusing to participate in the mechanism, a player can revert to playing the default game non-cooperatively. We show with an example that some allocation rules are implementable only with mechanisms which will be rejected on the equilibrium path. In our construction, a refusal to participate conveys information about the types of the players. This information causes the default game to be played under different beliefs, and more importantly under different higher order beliefs, than the interim ones. We find a lower bound on all the implementable payoffs. We use this bound to establish a condition on the default game under which all the implementable outcomes are truthfully implementable, without the need to induce rejection of the mechanism.

We analyze an adverse selection environment with third party supervision. The supervisor is partly informed of the agent's type. The supervisor and the agent collude while interacting with the principal. Contracting with the agent directly and ignoring the presence of the supervisor constitutes the no-supervision benchmark. We show that delegating to the supervisor reduces the principal's payoff compared to the no-supervision benchmark under a standard condition on the distribution of the agent's types. In contrast, if the principal contracts with both the agent and the supervisor, there exists a mechanism that improves the principal's payoff over the no-supervision payoff.

We study the optimal auction problem with participation costs in the symmetric independent private values setting, where bidders know their valuations when they make independent participation decisions. After characterizing the optimal auction in terms of participation cutoffs, we provide an example where it is asymmetric. We then investigate when the optimal auction will be symmetric/asymmetric and the nature of possible asymmetries. We also show that, under some conditions, the seller obtains her maximal profit in an (asymmetric) equilibrium of an anonymous second price auction. In general, the seller can also use non-anonymous auctions that resemble the ones that are actually observed in practice.

A principal contracts with a productive agent whose production cost is private information and with an insurer who can insure the principal against variations in the payment to the agent. The insurer and the agent can collude in their responses to the principal's contract. Non-cooperative play of the principal's contract constitutes the outside option for the colluding parties. In this setup, we characterize the implementable outcomes for the principal. We then identify the optimal implementable outcome under the assumption that the principal faces a budget constraint. The optimal outcome provides the principal with "partial" insurance. For higher realizations of the production cost, the budget may not be exhausted even though the principal is not directly concerned with the unspent portion of the monetary funds.

In this paper, we develop a model of law enforcement with the possibility of corruption between the enforcer and the potential offender. We study how the violation rate changes with the level of the fine imposed on violations. We show that there is always equilibrium violation regardless of the fine level. Moreover, we find, in contrast to the conventional wisdom, that the fine level that minimizes violations can be intermediate rather than large.

In this paper, we develop a model of law enforcement with the possibility of corruption between enforcers and potential offenders. We study how the violation rate changes with the level of the fine imposed on violations. We find, in contrast to the conventional wisdom, that the fine level that minimizes violations can be intermediate rather than large. We then study conditions under which different fine levels would be optimal.

We study an adverse selection problem, where an agent is able to understate his productivity, but not allowed to overstate it. The solution to this problem is generally different than the solution to the standard problem, where no restriction is made on the statements of the agent. We identify a sufficient condition, that does not depend on the distribution of types, under which these two solutions coincide.

We study the optimal auction problem with participation costs in the symmetric independent private values setting, where bidders know their valuations when they make independent participation decisions. After characterizing the optimal auction in terms of participation cuto¤s, we provide an example where it is asymmetric. We then investigate when the optimal auction will be symmetric/asymmetric and the nature of possible asymmetries. We also show that, under some conditions, the seller obtains her maximal pro…t in an (asymmetric) equilibrium of an anonymous second price auction. In general, the seller can also use non-anonymous auctions that resemble the ones that are actually observed in practice. JEL Classi…cation Numbers: C72, D44, D82.

I study a multi-player mechanism design problem where the players are able to collude. I char- acterize the extent that the principal can link the compensation level of one of these players to the production performance of the other. I use this characterization result to identify the optimal contract for a principal with budget constraints.

In this paper, I study a multi-player mechanism design problem under the assumption that the players are able to collude: The principal commits to making a transfer to the productive agent increasing in the output level. The principal also hires a supervisor, whose wage (potentially) depends on the output level as well. To insure himself against the uncertainty of the transfer, the principal wants the supervisor’s wage to be declining in the output level. Such an interdependent compensation structure brings in the question of collusion between the supervisor and the agent. I characterize the set of wage profiles that are consistent with the potential of collusion. I identify the optimal wage profile corresponding to the intended output profile. The optimal wage is decreasing in the output, so that supervision provides some insurance for the principal. However, the rate of change of the wage does not completely offset the rate of change of the transfer. Therefore full insurance is not attainable if collusion is possible.