Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance Contracting

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Performance Benchmarking

Part of the book series: Management for Professionals ((MANAGPROF))

  • 5200 Accesses

Abstract

One of the most interesting applications of benchmarking is to facilitate incentive provision. The design of incentive schemes is very important in firms, organizations and societies. It does not suffice to develop a perfectly coordinated plan. The agents involved in the plan must also have incentives to implement it.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Afriat SN (1972) Efficiency estimation of production functions. Int Econ Rev 13:568–598

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2000) Ekonomisk nätbesiktning. Final report stem. Technical report, SUMICSID AB (In Swedish)

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2001a) Incentive regulation. Working Paper

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2001b) Should health regulators use DEA? In: Fidalgo Eea (ed) Coordinacion e Incentivos en Sanidad, Asociasion de Economia de la Salud, Barcelona, pp.133–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2003) Norm models. Consultation report, Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE)

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2004) Nve network cost efficiency model. Technical report, Norwegian Energy Directorate NVE

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell P, Bogetoft P (2007) Development of benchmarking models for German electricity and gas distribution. Consultation report, Bundesnetzagentur, Bonn, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2008) Electricity and gas dso benchmarking whitepaper. Consulation report, Bundesnetzagentur

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell P, Bogetoft P (2009) International benchmarking of electricity transmission system operators - e3grid project. Consultation report, open version, Council of European Energy Regulators

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2010a) Benchmarking of german gas transmission system operators. Consultation report, Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P (2010b) A primer on regulation and benchmarking with examples from network industries. Technical Report version 05, SUMICSID AB

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Tind J (2001) A dual approach to noconvex frontier models. J Productivity Anal 16:129–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P, Tind J (2002) Incentive plans for productive efficiency, innovation and learning. Int J Prod Econ 78:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P, Bjørndalen J, Vanhanen J, Syrjänen M (2005a) Nemesys subproject A: system analysis. Consultation report, Nordenergi

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P, Tind J (2005b) Dea and dynamic yardstick competition in scandinavian electricity distribution. J Productivity Anal 23:173–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell P, Bogetoft P, Halbersma R, Mikkers M (2007) Yardstick competition for multi-product hospitals. NZa Research Paper 2007/1, NZa, Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell PJ, Bogetoft P, Cullmann A, von Hirschhausen C, Neumann A, Walter M (2008) Ergebnisdokumentation: Bestimmung der effizienzwerte verteilernetzbetreiber strom. Consultation report, Bundesnetzagentur

    Google Scholar 

  • Aigner DJ, Chu SF (1968) On estimating the industry production function. Am Econ Rev 58:826–839

    Google Scholar 

  • Aigner DJ, Lovell CAK, Schmidt P (1977) Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. J Econom 6:21–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen J, Bogetoft P (2007) Gains from quota trade: theoretical models and an application to the Danish fishery. Eur Rev Agric Econ 34(1):105–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen P, Petersen NC (1993) A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 39(10):1261–1264

    Google Scholar 

  • APQC (2011) American productivity and quality center. URL http://www.apqc.org/

  • Asmild M, Bogetoft P, Hougaard JL (2013) Rationalising inefficiency: a study of Canadian bank branches. Omega 41:80–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD (1980) A game theoretic approach to measuring efficiency. Eur J Oper Res 5:262–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD (1984) Estimating most productive scale size using data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 17(1):35–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Morey RC (1986) Efficiency analysis for exogenously fixed inputs and outputs. Oper Res 34(4):513–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Thrall R (1992) Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 62:74–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 30:1078–1092

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW, Clarke R (1989) Constrained game formulations and interpretations for data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 40:299–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Battese G, Coelli T (1992) Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data: with application to paddy farmers in India. J Productivity Anal 3:153–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1986) An efficiency evaluation of Danish police stations (In Danish). Technical report

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1990) Strategic responses to dea-control - a game theoretical analysis. Technical report, Copenhagen Business School

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1994a) Incentive efficient production frontiers: an agency perspective on DEA. Manag Sci 40:959–968

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1994b) Non-cooperative planning theory. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1995) Incentives and productivity measurements. Int J Prod Econ 39:67–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1996) DEA on relaxed convexity assumptions. Manag Sci 42:457–465

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (1997) DEA-based yardstick competition: the optimality of best practice regulation. Ann Oper Res 73:277–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P (2000) DEA and activity planning under asymmetric information. J Productivity Anal 13:7–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Gammeltvedt TE (2006) Mergers in norwegian electricity distribution: a cost saving exercise? Working paper, NVE, Norway

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Hougaard JL (2003) Rational inefficiencies. J Productivity Anal 20:243–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Katona K (2008) Efficiency gains from mergers in the healthcare sector. Technical report, Nederlandse Zorgautoriteit NZA

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Nielsen K (2004) Monitoring farm, herd and cow performance - efficiency analyses. Technical report, Royal Agricultural University and www.kvOT1;\aegforskning.dk

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Nielsen K (2005) Internet based benchmarking. J Group Decis Negotiation 14(3):195–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Nielsen K (2008) DEA based auctions. Eur J Oper Res 184:685–700

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Nielsen K (2012) Efficient and confidential reallocation of contracts: how the Danish sugar industry adapted to the new sugar regime. J Business Econ ZfB 81(2):165–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Otto L (2011) Benchmarking with DEA, SFA, and R. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Pruzan P (1991) Planning with multiple criteria, 1st edn. North-Holland, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Wang D (2005) Estimating the potential gains from mergers. J Productivity Anal 23:145–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Wittrup J (2011) Productivity and education: benchmarking of elementary school in denmark. Nordic Econ Policy Rev 2:257–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Tama J, Tind J (2000) Convex input and output projections of nonconvex production possibility sets. Manag Sci 46:858–869

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Strange N, Thorsen BJ (2003) Efficiency and merger gains in the Danish forestry extension service. Forest Sci 49(4):585–595

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Fried H, Eeckaut PV (2004) Power benchmarking: what’s wrong with traditional benchmarking and how to do it right. Technical report, Credit Union Research and Advice, Credit Union National Association, http://thepoint.cuna.org/

  • Bogetoft P, Bramsen JM, Nielsen K (2006a) Balanced benchmarking. Int J Bus Perform Manag 8(4):274–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Färe R, Obel B (2006b) Allocative efficiency of technically inefficient production units. Eur J Oper Res 168(2):450–462

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Boye K, Neergaard-Petersen H, Nielsen K (2007a) Reallocating sugar beet contracts: can sugar production survive in Denmark. Eur Rev Agric Econ 34(1):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Fried H, Eeckaut PV (2007b) The university benchmarker: an interactive computer approach. In: Bonaccorsi A, Daraio C (eds) Universities And Strategic Knowledge Creation, Chap 14. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, Northampton

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Christensen D, Damgård I, Geisler M, Jakobsen T, Krøigaard M, Nielsen J, Nielsen J, Nielsen K, Pagter J, et al. (2009) Secure multiparty computation goes live. Financial cryptography and data security. Springer, Berlin, pp. 325–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft P, Kristensen T, Pedersen KM (2010) Potential gains from hospital mergers in Denmark. Health Care Manag Sci Energy Policy, 30(8):637-647

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowlin W (1997) A proposal for designing employment contracts for government managers. Socioecon Plann Sci 31:205–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Brännlund R, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1995) Environmental regulation and profitability: an application to Swedish pulp and paper mills. Environ Resour Econ 6(1):23–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Brännlund R, Chung Y, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1998) Emissions trading and profitability: the Swedish pulp and paper industry. Environ Resour Econ 12:345–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundesnetzagentur (2007) Bericht der bundesnetzagentur nach § 112a enwg zur einführung der anreizregulierung nach § 21a enwg. Report, Bundesnetzagentur

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves DW, Christensen LR, Diewert WE (1982) The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity. Econometrica 50(6):1393–1414

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers RG (1988) Applied production analysis: a dual approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers RG, Chung Y, Färe R (1998) Profit, directional distance functions, and nerlovian efficiency. J Optim Theory Appl 2:351–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang KP (1999) Measuring efficiency with quasiconcave production frontiers. Eur J Oper Res 115:497–506

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang K, Guh Y (1991) Linear production functions and the data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 52:215–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1979) Short communication: measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 3:339

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Lewin AY, Seiford LM (1995) Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology and applications. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Wei QL, Huang ZM (1989) Cone ratio data envelopment analysis and multi-objective programming. Int J Syst Sci 20:1099–1118

    Google Scholar 

  • Che YK (1993) Design competition through multidimensional auctions. RAND J Econ 24(4):668–680

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen LR, Jorgenson DW, Lau LJ (1973) Transcendental logarithmic production frontiers. Rev Econ Stat 55:28–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Coelli T, Prasada Rao DS, Battese G (1998) An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Coelli T, Estache A, Perelman S, Trujillo L (2003) A primer on efficiency measurement for utilities and transport regulators. Technical Report 129, World Bank Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Tone K (2000) Data envelopment analysis. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Tone K (2007) Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software, 2nd edn. Springer, Secaucus

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox D, Hinkley D (1974) Theoretical statistics. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • CUNA CUNA (2010) Cub. URL http://advice.cuna.org/cu_benchmarker.html

  • Dalen DM (1996) Strategic responses to relative evaluation of bureaus: implication for bureaucratic slack. J Productivity Anal 7:29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalen DM, Gomez-Lobo A (1997) Estimating cost functions in regulated industries under asymmetric information. Eur Econ Rev 31:935–942

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalen DM, Gomez-Lobo A (2001) Yardstick on the road: regulatory contracts and cost efficiency in the Norwegian bus industry. Working Paper, Norwegian School of Management

    Google Scholar 

  • Debreu G (1951) The coefficient of resource utilization. Econometrica 19(3):273–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz H (1968) Why regulate utilities? J Law Econ 11(1):55-65

    Google Scholar 

  • Denrell J (2005) Selection bias and the perils of benchmarking. Harvard Bus Rev 83(4):114–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Deprins D, Simar L, Tulkens H (1984) Measuring labor efficiency in post offices. Technical report. In: Marchand M, Pestieau P, Tulkens H (eds) The performance of public enterprises: concepts and measurements. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 243–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorfman R, Samuelson P, Solow R (1958) Linear programming and economic analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eldenburg LG, Wolcott SK (2005) Cost management - measuring, monitoring, and motivating performance. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell MJ (1957) The measurement of productive efficiency. J Royal Stat Soc 120:253–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S (2000) Network DEA. Socioecon Plann Sci 34:35–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Primont D (1995) Multi-output production and duality: theory and applications. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK, Yaisawatng S (1993) Derivation of shadow prices for undesirable outputs: a distance function approach. Rev Econ Stat 75:374–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lindgren B, Ross P (1994) Productivity development in swedish hopsitals: a malmquist output index approach. In: Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology, and application, Chap 13. Kluwer, Boston, pp 253–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lundström M, Roos P (2007) Evaluating health care efficiency. Scientific Report 1: 2007, R. R., Institute of Applied Economics

    Google Scholar 

  • Fethi M, Jackson PM, Weyman-Jones TG (2001) European airlines: a stochastic dea study of efficiency with market liberalisation. Technical report, University of Leicester Efficiency and Productivity Research Unit

    Google Scholar 

  • Försund F, Hjalmarsson L (1979) Generalized farrell measures of efficiency: an application to milk processing in Swedish dairy plants. Econ J 89:294–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Førsund F, Kittelsen S (1998) Productivity development of Norwegian electricity distribution utilities. Resour Energy Econ 20:207–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox KJ (1999) Efficiency at different levels of aggregation: public vs. private sector firms. Econ Lett 65:173176

    Google Scholar 

  • Gale D (1960) The theory of linear economic models. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Government TF (2007) Verordnung zum erlass und zur änderung von rechtsvorschriften auf dem gebiet der energieregulierung. Germany Teil I Nr. 55, Bundesgesetzblatt

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene W (2008) Econometric analysis, 6th edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene WH (1990) A gamma-distributed stochastic frontier model. J Econom 46:141–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadley G (1962) Linear programming. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillier FS, Lieberman GJ (2010) Introduction to operations research, 9th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibensoft (2010a) User guide to administration module of interactive benchmarking ib. Technical report, Ibensoft ApS

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibensoft (2010b) User guide to interactive benchmarking ib. Technical report, Ibensoft ApS

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs R, Smith PC, Street A (2006) Measuring efficiency in health care. Cambrigde University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans T (1951) Activity analysis of production and allocation. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumbhakar SC, Lovel CAK (2000) Stochastic frontier analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen T (2001) Dea with efficiency classification preserving conditional convexity. Eur J Oper Res 132:83–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen T (2003) Duality theory of non-convex technologies. J Productivity Anal 20:273–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Laffont JJ, Tirole J (1993) A theory of incentives in procurement and regulation. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Langset T (2009) Rundskriv eø 4/2009 om beregning av inntektsrammer og kostnadsnorm for 2010. (In Norwegian) NVE 2009 04925-4, The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE)

    Google Scholar 

  • Land KC, Lovel CAK, Thore S (1993) Chance-constrained data envelopment analysis. Managerial Decis Econ 14:541–554

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazear E, Rosen S (1981) Rank-order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. J Political Econ 89:841–864

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann EL (1983) Theory of point estimation. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin A, Morey RC (1981) Measuring the relative efficiency and output potential of public sector organizations: an application of data envelopment analysis. J Policy Anal Inf Syst 5:267–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Littlechild S (1983) Regulation of british telecommunications’ profitability: report to the secretary of state. Technical report, Department of Industry, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovell CAK (1993) Production frontiers and productive efficiency. In: Fried H, Lovell CAK, Schmidt S (eds) The measurement of productive efficiency: techniques and applications. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Luenberger DG (1984) Linear and nonlinear programming, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Luenberger D (1992) Benefit functions and duality. J Math Econ 21:461–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Malmquist S (1953) Index numbers and indifference curves. Trabajos de Estatistica 4:209–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Nalebuff BJ, Stiglitz JE (1983) Prizes and incentives: towards a general theory of compensation and competition. Bell J Econ 14:21–43

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2006) Health care quality indicators project conceptual framework paper. Technical report, OECD Health Working Papers

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen O, Petersen NC (1995) Chance constrained efficiency evaluation. Manag Sci 41(3):442–457

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen O, Petersen NC (2002) The use of data envelopment analysis with probabilistic assurance regions for measuring hospital efficiency. J Productivity Anal 17:83–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen OB, Petersen NC (2007) Target and technical efficiency in dea – controlling for environmental characteristics. Working Paper, the University of Southern Denmark

    Google Scholar 

  • Paradi JC, Vela S, Yang Z (2004) Assessing bank and bank branch performance: modeling considerations and approaches. In: Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Zhu J (eds) Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen N (1990) Data envelopment analysis on a relaxed set of assumptions. Manag Sci 36(3):305–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Post GT (2001) Estimating non-convex production sets using transconcave dea. Eur J Oper Res 131:132–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao CR (1973) Linear statistical inference and its applications, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Resende M (2001) Relative efficiency measurement and prospects for yardstick competition in brazilian electricity distribution. Energy Policy (In Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Richmond J (1974) Estimating the efficiency of production. Int Econ Rev 15:515–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigby DK (2011a) Management tools 2011 - an executive’s guide. Technical report, Bain & Company Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigby DK (2011b) Management tools and trends 2011. Technical report, Bain & Company Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigsrevisionen (2000) Report to the state auditors on court productivity etc. (In: Danish:beretning til statsrevisorerne om retternes produktivitet mv.). Technical report, Danish Auditor General‘s Office

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggiero J (1996) On the measurement of technical efficiency in the public sector. Eur J Oper Res 90:553–565

    Google Scholar 

  • Seiford LM (1994) A dea bibliography (1978–1992). In: Charnes A, Cooper W, Lewin A (eds) Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology, and application, Kluwer, Boston, pp. 437–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Shephard RW (1953) Cost and production functions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, reprinted as Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, 1st edn, vol. 194 (Springer, Berlin, 1981)

    Google Scholar 

  • Shephard RW (1970) Theory of cost and production functions. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheriff G (2001) Using data envelopment analysis to design contracts under asymmetric information. Technical report, University of Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer A (1985) A theory of yardstick competition. Rand J Econ 16:319–327

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvey SD (1970) Statistical inference. Chapmann and Hall, London (reprinted with corrections 1975)

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith P (1976) On the statistical estimation of parametric frontier production functions. Rev Econ Stat 58:238–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavaras G (2002) A bibliography of data envelopment analysis (1978–2001). Technical report, Rutgers Centre of Operations Research

    Google Scholar 

  • Thanassoulis E (2000) DEA and its use in the regulation of water companies. Eur J Oper Res 127:1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Thanassoulis E, Portela M, Allen R (2004) Handbook on data envelopment analysis, Kluwer, Dodrecht, Ch 4 Incorporating Value Judgements in DEA, pp. 99–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Tirole J (1988) The theory of industrial organization. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulkens H (1993) On fdh efficiency analysis: some methodological issues and applications to retail banking, courts and urban transit. J Productivity Anal 4:183–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Varian HR (1992) Microeconomic analysis, 3rd edn. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter M, Cullmann A (2008) Potential gains from mergers in local public transport – an efficiency analysis applied to germany. Technical report, Technische Universitat Dresden

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunsch P (1995) Peer comparison and regulation: an application to urban mass transit firms in europe. PhD thesis, Department of Economics, UniversitÈ Catholique de Louvain, p 182

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Copenhagen Business School CBS, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Peter Bogetoft

  2. Yale School of Management, Yale Univeristy, New Haven, USA

    Peter Bogetoft

Authors
  1. Peter Bogetoft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bogetoft, P. (2012). Performance Contracting. In: Performance Benchmarking. Management for Professionals. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6043-5_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation