A Model of Leadership: Insiders versus Outsiders∗
نویسندگان
چکیده
Leadership is a combination of the ability to make good decisions and to motivate subordinates. If subordinates have their own information about the quality of their leaders’ options, these two objectives might conflict with each other. Using a model in which a leaders’ ability to make good decisions is private information we show how this conflict leads to inefficient decision–making. Depending on whether the leader is an insider who observes the subordinates information or an outsider with respect to whom the subordinates information is private, two different types of inefficiencies exist. We show that an insider will follow the information of worse informed subordinates in order to improve the subordinates’ belief in the leader’s decision. On the other hand an outsider with sufficiently high ability will refrain from consulting his subordinates in order to signal that he is well informed, although the subordinates’ information might improve the leader’s decisions. Comparing these two inefficiencies quantitatively will have implications for the question of organizational design. ∗We are grateful to Michele Piccione and Andrea Prat for their guidance during our PhD studies at the London School of Economics. We also thank Gilat Levy, Margaret Meyer, George Baker and participants of the PIPPS conference in Bristol, 2003 for valuable suggestions. †London School of Economics and Political Science. Email: [email protected] ‡London School of Economics and Political Science. Email: [email protected]
منابع مشابه
A Theoretical Framework for Several Antecedents of Shared Leadership in Corporate Board Contexts
Due to the gap in understanding board leadership and specifically, board shared leadership, this article aims at proposing some antecedents of the emergence of board shared leadership. This article incorporates three bodies of literature: Team effectiveness, team leadership, and board management. Based on integrating several theoretical perspectives, nine propositions are developed in relation ...
متن کاملCrowdfunding without Intermediation?
I develop a game-theoretic model to study information asymmetries in the evolving equity crowdfunding market. I assume (1) there are two types of investors: informed (“insiders”) and uninformed (“outsiders”); (2) the insiders invest first; and (3) the outsiders observe the aggregate of insiders’ actions and then decide whether to invest. Under these assumptions, I prove that there does not exis...
متن کاملWelcome A Theory of Board Control and Size
We extend the traditional view of corporate boards as monitors to include a role for outside board members as suppliers of expertise or information. Indeed, both outsiders and insiders may have private information relevant to the decision. Because of the agency problem between managers and owners (who are assumed to be represented by the outside directors), neither party will communicate his or...
متن کاملDepartment of Economics Insiders - Outsiders , Transparency and the Value of the Ticker
We consider a multi-period rational expectations model in which risk-averse investors differ in their information on past transaction prices (the ticker). Some investors (insiders) observe prices in real-time whereas other investors (outsiders) observe prices with a delay. As prices are informative about the asset payoff, insiders get a strictly larger expected utility than outsiders. Yet, info...
متن کاملGive Everybody a Voice! The Power of Voting in a Public Goods Experiment with Externalities
We study the effect of voting when insiders’ public goods provision may affect passive outsiders. Without voting insiders’ contributions do not differ, regardless of whether outsiders are positively or negatively affected or even unaffected. Voting on the recommended contribution level enhances contributions if outsiders are unaffected and internalizes the negative externality by lowering contr...
متن کاملOutcomes for patients with the same disease treated inside and outside of randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND It is unclear whether participation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), irrespective of assigned treatment, is harmful or beneficial to participants. We compared outcomes for patients with the same diagnoses who did ("insiders") and did not ("outsiders") enter RCTs, without regard to the specific therapies received for their respective diagnoses. METHODS By searching the MEDLIN...
متن کامل