Search results

This paper aims to investigate the role of certification in providing information and reducing market inefficiencies when the “certification process is imperfect”. In the setting, eco-labels imperfectly signal environmental product quality to consumers where the error in the process of certification could be either Type 1 or Type 2 error. The paper examines firms' incentive to get certified, equilibrium quantities and profits. The authors use perfect Bayesian equilibrium concept for the analysis. They then examine conditions for separating and pooling equilibrium to exist and welfare implications of certification process.

The paper uses a vertical product differentiated model where firms are competing in quantities. Consumers are unable to observe the environmental quality of the product. To signal the product quality to consumers, firms may adopt certification by a third party. Using a framework where certification process is imperfect, the paper derives conditions for Perfect Bayesian separating and pooling equilibrium to exist.

The paper shows that the existence of separating and pooling equilibrium depends on the certification fee. A separating equilibrium, where one firm seeks certification and other firm does not seek certification exists for an intermediate value of certification fee. A pooling equilibrium, where both firms seek certification, exists only when the certification fee is sufficiently small. The paper shows conditions for the certification fee for which welfare will be higher under separating equilibrium as compared to pooling equilibrium and analyses welfare implications for subsidy policy for the certification fee.

The paper contributes to the literature by examining the role of labelling under imperfect certification.

The purpose of this paper is to show that outsourcing can occur as outcome of a separating or pooling perfect Bayesian equilibrium although it is not profitable under complete information. Therefore, asymmetric information can itself be a reason for outsourcing.

The present paper constructs a model of two firms interacting in the product market under asymmetric information where one firm has private information about its technological capability, and it has the option to produce inputs in-house or buy inputs from an input market. However, using outsourced inputs involves a fixed cost at the plant level. The model solves for perfect Bayesian equilibrium.

There are situations when under complete information, outsourcing of the input will not occur, but, under incomplete information, either only the low-cost type or both high and low-cost types will go for outsourcing, and there always exist reasonable beliefs supporting these equilibria. In particular, when the fixed cost is neither too small not too large, a separating equilibrium occurs in which the low-cost type outsources inputs from the input market but the high-cost type produces in-house; hence, outsourcing signals the firm’s type. Outsourcing by only the high-cost type firm will never occur in equilibrium.

That incomplete or asymmetric information can itself be a reason for strategic outsourcing is never identified in the literature. The present paper is an attempt to fill this gap and raise the issue of outsourcing in an incomplete information environment.

In construction projects, engineering variations are very common and create breeding grounds for opportunistic claims. This study investigates the complementary effect between an inspection mechanism and a reputation system in deterring opportunistic claims, considering an employer with limited inspection accuracy and a contractor, which can be either reputation-concerned or opportunistic.

This paper applies a signaling game to investigate the complementary effect between the employer's inspection and a reputation system in deterring the contractor's possible opportunistic claim, considering the information-flow influence of claiming prices.

This study finds that in the exogenous-inspection-accuracy case, the employer does not always inspect the claim. A more stringent reputation system complements a less accurate inspection only when the inspection cost is lower than a threshold, but may decline the employer's surplus or social welfare. In the optimal-inspection-accuracy case, the employer always inspects the claim. However, only a sufficiently stringent reputation system can guarantee the effectiveness of an optimal inspection in curbing opportunistic claims. A more stringent reputation system has a value-stepping effect on the employer's surplus but may unexpectedly impair social welfare, whereas a higher inspection cost efficiency always reduces social welfare.

This article contributes to the project management literature by combing the signaling game theory with the reputation theory and thus embeds the problem of inspection mechanism design into a broader socio-economic framework.

The purpose of this study is to establish a comprehensive service recovery mechanism by analyzing different behaviors of customers with different personality traits after service failures and by proposing different service recovery measures that service providers could adopt based on diverse customer personality traits.

This paper constructs a service recovery mechanism based on a signaling game theory by considering customers and service providers as two players in the game and analyzing possible outcomes under both separating and pooling equilibria to achieve an optimized strategy and set of actions that allow the highest payoffs for both service providers and customers.

This study successfully simulated the separating equilibrium and pooling equilibrium between service providers and customers in a signaling game with incomplete information. It also provides a reference for service providers to design service recovery strategies after service failures. By using this model, when facing problems related to service failures and service recovery, service providers will have a better chance of increasing the service recovery success rate, improving customer satisfaction and achieving optimal payoffs for both themselves and their customers.

Based on concepts of service science, this study designed a service recovery mechanism by applying the signaling game from game theory and introducing personality traits theory to the service recovery scenario so that service providers are able to execute service recovery after service failures more effectively. This study proposed a service recovery mechanism based on the perspectives of both service providers and customers, considering the mutual influence of key variables related to both of them, as well as the context of service failures, customers’ personality traits and service providers’ available resources. Many studies have applied personality traits to different fields; however, to the best of authors’ knowledge, few studies have applied this concept to service-related subjects, and only the influence of employees’ personality traits on service providers has been discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to test whether underpricing can serve as a signal of quality in a financing-investment environment and to compare it under the two institutions for financing offers that are commonly observed in corporate financial markets: take-it-or-leave-it offer (TLO) and the competitive bidding offer (CBO).

The research paper uses experimental economics methodology and laboratory experiments to investigate the research question.

The results suggest that underpricing can serve as a signal of quality but not sustainable as a repeat strategy. Over time, the high-quality firms converge to a pooling strategy rather than bearing the cost of signaling. Additionally, underpricing is lower under CBO than under TLO institution due to competitive bidding. Signaling under CBO institution may be less salient due to possible mimicking by the low-quality firms.

This paper presents a first experimental investigation of the underpricing-signaling hypothesis in a financing-investment environment under asymmetric information. The choice of institution in a financing environment produces qualitatively and strategically different behavior among firms and investors.

This paper aims to manage better the conflicts in labor disputes by improving the understanding of mediation dynamics from a game-theoretical perspective.

Signaling game model is adapted to a hypothetical labor dispute based on the legislative regulations on the mandatory mediation system in Turkey.

The paper determines mediation equilibria in which both players get positive payoffs. Analysis of the mediation equilibria helps to improve the understanding about the litigation and mediation dynamics depending on the variables. The variables are clearly separated from each other due to their reverse effects on strategy choices of the parties. Mediation payoff and litigation cost are characterized by their incentive effects on mediation preferences, whereas mediation fee and litigation payoff are characterized by their disincentive effect. While increasing amounts of incentive variables strengthen the mediation tendency of the employee, increasing amounts of disincentive variables reveal the opposite effect. Furthermore, the analysis also indicates that if the litigation payoff is too small to recover litigation costs, accepting the mediation becomes the optimal strategy. This prediction is contrary to that of traditional game-theoretic litigation/settlement models, in which small-claim disputes typically cannot be settled.

The assumption that the mediation fee is not a part of the litigation cost eliminates the disincentive effect of mediation fee and makes it neutral on the strategy choice of employee.

This paper first analyzes the strategic role of mediation in labor disputes by using a signaling game. Despite its mediation focus, the paper also provides practical insights for litigation.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze a market for microfinance in a region of a developing nation in which all projects are either of high or low quality. There is adverse selection because only borrowers know whether their project is of high or low quality but the microfinance institutions (MFIs) do not. The MFIs are competitive, risk neutral, and they offer loan contracts specifying the amount to be repaid only if a borrower's project makes a profit. Otherwise, this borrower defaults on his contract.

A game theoretic model is used that explicitly accounts for adverse selection and then a study is made of the trinity of adverse selection, loan default, and self‐financing.

First, in the pooling equilibrium, a borrower with a low‐quality business project will obtain positive expected profit. In contrast, this borrower will obtain zero expected profit in the separating equilibrium. Second, for small enough values of the probability p that a business project is of high quality, MFIs will not finance any business project in the pooling equilibrium. Third, the cost of sending a signal is not too high and hence a separating equilibrium exists. Finally, under some circumstances, self‐financing can be used to mitigate adverse selection related problems

This paper studies a model with only two types of business projects. In addition, no allowance is made for repeated interactions between borrowers and MFIs.

This paper usefully shows that under some circumstances, a credible signaling device such as self‐financing can be used to mitigate adverse selection related problems that routinely plague interactions between poor borrowers in developing countries and MFIs.

This paper examines the adverse selection problem associated with the pre‐completion marketing of property developments. When developers choose to finance their projects by pre‐selling in a pooling equilibrium, they pass on the risk of failure to the buyers and increase expected profits. Pre‐selling not only places buyers at a potential disadvantage if unexpected negative price shocks occur, but encourages more less‐profitable projects to be undertaken by bad developers. In addition, pre‐selling aggravates the building boom and bust cycle. However, the adverse selection problem can be eliminated if good developers choose to separate themselves by not pre‐selling under the appropriate conditions. This paper also examines interesting comparative statics and policy implications.

A large literature studies why firms self-regulate and “signal green.” However, it has ignored that regulators have enforcement discretion, and may act strategically. We fill this gap. We build a game theoretic model of whether a firm should signal its type through substantial self-regulation. We find self-regulation is a double-edged sword: it can potentially preempt legislation, but it can also lead regulators to demand higher levels of compliance from greener firms if preemption fails. We show how self-regulatory decisions depend upon industry characteristics and political responsiveness to corporate environmental leadership. We have made a number of simplifying assumptions. We assume activist groups cannot challenge regulatory flexibility in court, and that regulatory penalties are fixed and are not collected by the regulator. Firms with low compliance costs confront a tradeoff regarding self-regulation. They can blend in with the rest of the industry, and take few self-regulatory steps. This reduces the risk of regulation somewhat, and preserves their ability to obtain regulatory flexibility should regulation be imposed. Alternatively, they can step up with substantial self-regulation. This better mitigates the risk of regulation, but at the risk of signaling low costs and becoming a target for stringent enforcement should regulation pass. Recent work has found negative market reactions to corporate claims of voluntary emissions reductions, despite the conventional wisdom that it “pays to be green.” We offer a new explanation to scholars and managers: regulatory discretion may undermine the ability of industry self-regulation to profitably preempt mandatory regulatory requirements.

This paper aims to study a strategic decision of banks in Thailand to signal their types to the market and derive the optimal credit derivatives contract to guarantee their loans and credibly signal their quality under different economic determinants, namely, the maximum credit risk investment constraint, opportunity cost and opaqueness of the credit derivative market.

Contract theory is deployed to derive the expected payoff of different bank types under different economic and financial constraints. Hence, different bank types offer derivatives contracts to signal their loan quality and resell their loans in the secondary loan markets of Thailand.

The optimal derivatives contract is constructed on a basis of asymmetric information when banks have more private information concerning quality of their loans. A digital credit default swap is an optimal derivatives contract to send credible signal when banks are restricted to the maximum investment constraint. Moreover, profit of banks is reduced, as the optimal derivatives contract is more costly when banks are subjected to positive opportunity cost and opacity of the credit derivatives market. These results depict impact of changes of the maximum credit risk investment constraint on Thai credit derivatives market.

The optimal credit derivatives design that signifies bank types and facilitates loan purchase agreement has not been studied in Thai secondary loan markets before. In addition, this study provides insights of banks' strategic decisions to signal their types and transfer risk to risk buyers in Thai markets.