Skip to main content
Log in

Incentive roles of fringe benefits in compensation contracts

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to establish a new insight into the potential benefit of fringe benefits used by firms in compensation contracts. We show that fringe benefits have a role to provide incentives and reduce agency costs. In an agency model with moral hazard, we examine the optimal incentive package that involves salary, equity shares, and fringe benefits. Based on the notion that fringe benefits are imperfect substitutes for salary and (weakly) complementary to effort, we show how the optimal package may include an excessive provision of fringe benefits that exceeds the first-best level, and why it involves a distortion towards overconsumption of fringe benefits in terms of the manager's preferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerlof, G. A. (1982): “Labor Contracts as Partial Gift Exchange”.Quarterly Journal of Economics 97: 543–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dye, R. A., and Antle, R. (1984): “Self-selection via Fringe Benefits”.Journal of Labor Economics 2: 388–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, S. J., and Hart, O. D. (1983): “An Analysis of the Principal-Agent Problem”.Econometrica 51: 7–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M., and Raviv, A. (1979): “Optimal Incentive Contracts with Imperfect Information”.Journal of Economic Theory 20: 231–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1991): “The Theory of Capital Structure”.Journal of Finance 46: 297–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. D., and Holmström, B. (1987): “Theory of Contracts”. InAdvances in Economic Theory (Econometric Society Monographs, Fifth World Congress), edited by T. Bewley. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugen, R. A., and Senbet, L. W. (1981): “Resolving the Agency Problems of External Capital through Options”.Journal of Finance 36: 629–647.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmer, T. (1993): “Risk-free Incentive Contracts”.Journal of Accounting and Economics 16: 447–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmström, B. (1979): “Moral Hazard and Observability”.Bell Journal of Economics 10: 74–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmström, B., and Milgrom, P. R. (1991): “Multitask Principal—Agent Analysis: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design”.Journal of Law, Economics and Organization V7, Special Issue: 29–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L. (1973): “Risk Independence and Multiattributed Utility Functions”.Econometrica 41: 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., and Meckling, W. H. (1976): “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure”.Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewitt, I. (1988): “Justifying the First-order Approach to Principal—Agent Problems”.Econometrica 56: 1177–1190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgrom, P. R. (1981): “Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications”.Bell Journal of Economics 13: 380–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirrlees, J. A. (1971): “An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation”.Review of Economic Studies 38: 175–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1975): “The Theory of Moral Hazard and Observable Behavior: Part 1”. Working Paper, Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1976): “The Optimal Structure of Incentives and Authority within an Organization”.Bell Journal of Economics 7: 105–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollak, R. A. (1967): “Additive von Neumann-Morgenstern Utility Functions”.Econometrica 35: 485–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogerson, W. P. (1985): “The First-order Approach to Principal—Agent Problems”.Econometrica 53: 1357–1367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. A. (1973): “The Economic Theory of Agency: the Principal's Problem”.American Economic Review 63: 134–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sappington, D. (1983): “Limited Liability Contracts between Principal and Agent”.Journal of Economic Theory 29: 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selender, A., and Zou, L. (1994): “Limited Liability and the Underlying-asset Constraint: on the Use of Share-derivative Contracts to Resolve Agency Problems”.Journal of Economics/Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie 59: 149–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavell, S. (1979): “Risk Sharing and Incentives in the Principal and Agent Relationship”.Bell Journal of Economics 10: 55–73.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zou, L. Incentive roles of fringe benefits in compensation contracts. Zeitschr. f. Nationalökonomie 65, 181–199 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01226934

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01226934

Keywords

JEL classification

Navigation