不使用自由裁量控制的隐性成本

Jeremy Douthit, Jing L. Davis, Steven T. Schwartz, Richard A. Young
{"title":"不使用自由裁量控制的隐性成本","authors":"Jeremy Douthit, Jing L. Davis, Steven T. Schwartz, Richard A. Young","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3308632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the effect of a principal’s choice on the availability of discretionary controls, where discretionary controls are defined as those not supported by enforceable explicit contracts. In contrast to prior findings on explicit controls, we find that agent reciprocity is not significantly less when principals choose a discretionary control than when they are exogenously available. That is, we find no hidden costs of discretionary control. We tentatively attribute this finding to agents viewing discretionary controls as less intrusive than explicit controls. Interestingly, we find that agent reciprocity is less when principals choose to forgo discretionary controls than when the discretionary controls are not available. One explanation for this result is that agents perceive that principals who turn down the option to have discretionary controls available place less value on agents’ norm-adhering behavior than other principals. These findings support the often-used managerial practice of using discretionary controls.","PeriodicalId":357263,"journal":{"name":"Managerial Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Hidden Costs of Not Using Discretionary Controls\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Douthit, Jing L. Davis, Steven T. Schwartz, Richard A. Young\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3308632\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigates the effect of a principal’s choice on the availability of discretionary controls, where discretionary controls are defined as those not supported by enforceable explicit contracts. In contrast to prior findings on explicit controls, we find that agent reciprocity is not significantly less when principals choose a discretionary control than when they are exogenously available. That is, we find no hidden costs of discretionary control. We tentatively attribute this finding to agents viewing discretionary controls as less intrusive than explicit controls. Interestingly, we find that agent reciprocity is less when principals choose to forgo discretionary controls than when the discretionary controls are not available. One explanation for this result is that agents perceive that principals who turn down the option to have discretionary controls available place less value on agents’ norm-adhering behavior than other principals. These findings support the often-used managerial practice of using discretionary controls.\",\"PeriodicalId\":357263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Managerial Accounting eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Managerial Accounting eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3308632\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managerial Accounting eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3308632","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了委托人的选择对自由裁量控制的可用性的影响,其中自由裁量控制被定义为那些没有可执行的明确合同支持的控制。与先前关于显性控制的研究结果相反,我们发现,当委托人选择自由裁量控制时,代理人的互惠性并不比当委托人选择外源性控制时少得多。也就是说,我们没有发现自由裁量控制的隐性成本。我们暂时将这一发现归因于代理人认为自由裁量控制比明确控制更具侵入性。有趣的是,我们发现当委托人选择放弃自由裁量控制时,代理人的互惠性比自由裁量控制不可用时要低。对这一结果的一种解释是,代理人认为,拒绝自由裁量控制的委托人比其他委托人更不重视代理人遵守规范的行为。这些发现支持了经常使用的自由裁量控制的管理实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Hidden Costs of Not Using Discretionary Controls
This study investigates the effect of a principal’s choice on the availability of discretionary controls, where discretionary controls are defined as those not supported by enforceable explicit contracts. In contrast to prior findings on explicit controls, we find that agent reciprocity is not significantly less when principals choose a discretionary control than when they are exogenously available. That is, we find no hidden costs of discretionary control. We tentatively attribute this finding to agents viewing discretionary controls as less intrusive than explicit controls. Interestingly, we find that agent reciprocity is less when principals choose to forgo discretionary controls than when the discretionary controls are not available. One explanation for this result is that agents perceive that principals who turn down the option to have discretionary controls available place less value on agents’ norm-adhering behavior than other principals. These findings support the often-used managerial practice of using discretionary controls.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Truncated Balancing Policy for Perishable Inventory Management: Combating High Shortage Penalties Disclosure Paternalism Legal Expertise and the Role of Litigation Risk in Firms’ Conservatism Choices Is Consistency the Panacea? Inconsistent or Consistent Tax Transfer Prices with Strategic Taxpayer and Tax Authority Behavior Government Transparency and Firm-Level Operational Efficiency
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1