Dynamics of Contract Design with Screening

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1600

References

  • Abreu D, Pearce D, Stacchetti E. Toward a theory of discounted repeated games with imperfect monitoring. Econometrica (1990) 58:1041–1063CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bhattacharyya S, Lafontaine F. Double-sided moral hazard and the nature of share contracts. RAND J. Econom. (1996) 26:761–781CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Biais B, Mariotti T, Plantin G, Rochet JC. Dynamic security design: Convergence to continuous time and asset pricing implications. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2007) 74:345–390CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cvitanić J, Wan X, Zhang J. Continuous-time principal-agent problems with hidden action and lump-sum payment. Appl. Math. Optim. (2008) 59:99–146CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • DeMarzo PM, Sannikov Y. Optimal security design and dynamic capital structure in a continuous-time agency model. J. Finance (2006) 61:2681–2724CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fong KG. Evaluating skilled experts: Optimal scoring rules for surgeons. (2009) . Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  • Giat Y, Hackman ST, Subramanian A. Investment under uncertainty, heterogeneous beliefs and agency conflicts. Rev. Financial Stud. (2010) 23:1360–1404CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Green E, Prescott E, Wallace N. Lending and the smoothing of uninsurable income. Contractual Arrangements for Intertemporal Trade (1987) (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis) Google Scholar
  • He Z, Wei B, Yu J. Optimal long-term contracting with learning. (2012) . Working paper, Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  • Holmstrom B, Milgrom P. Aggregation and linearity in the provision of intertemporal incentives. Econometrica (1987) 55:303–328CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kwak DY. Numerical PDE. (2007) . Lecture note. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, DaejeonGoogle Scholar
  • Laffont JJ, Martimort D. The Theory of Incentives: The Principal-Agent Model (2002) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Prat J, Jovanovic B. Dynamic incentive contracts under parameter uncertainty. (2010) . Working paper, New York University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  • Sannikov Y. Agency problems, screening and increasing credit lines. (2007a) . Working paper, Princeton University, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  • Sannikov Y. Games with imperfectly observable actions in continuous time. Econometrica (2007b) 75:1285–1329CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sannikov Y. A continuous-time version of the principal-agent problem. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2008) 75:957–984CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schättler H, Sung J. The first-order approach to continuous-time principal-agent problem with exponential utility. J. Econom. Theory (1993) 61:331–371CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schättler H, Sung J. On optimal sharing rules in discrete and continuous-times principal-agent problems with exponential utility. J. Econom. Dynam. Control (1997) 21:551–574CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Spear S, Srivastava S. On repeated moral hazard with discounting. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1987) 54:599–617CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sung J. Linearity with project selection and controllable diffusion rate in continuous-time principal-agent problems. RAND J. Econom. (1995) 26:720–743CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sung J. Corporate insurance and managerial incentives. J. Econom. Theory (1997) 74:297–332CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sung J. Optimal contracts under adverse selection and moral hazard: A continuous-time approach. Rev. Financial Stud. (2005) 18:1021–1073CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wan X. Dynamic agency, costly project search and repeated private shocks. (2011) . Working paper, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, KowloonGoogle Scholar
  • Williams N. On dynamic principal-agent problems in continuous time. (2006) . Working paper, University of Wisconsin–Madison, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  • Williams N. Persistent private information. Econometrica (2011) 79:1233–1275CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zhang Y. Dynamic contracting with persistent shocks. J. Econom. Theory (2009) 144:635–675CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.