Abstract:In a series of papers Holmstrom, Milgrom and Roberts have argued that incentives for agents tend to be complementary under certain conditions. A growing body of empirical literature also appears to support this notion. Data constraints, however, have limited the studies to some particular industries or to a selective few aspects in agency contracts. This paper examines the complementarity and substitutability of CEO incentives of more than 300 Chinese state-owned enterprises from a panel data set. The data contain rich information about CEO pay sensitivity; whether the CEO posted performance bond; managerial discretion in production, in employee wage discretion, share of output to sell to the market (versus being required to deliver to the state at lower price); and contract duration. In explaining the interaction of incentives, we extend the framework of Holmstrom and Milgrom (1994) to accommodate the case of multiple signals for the manager's effort for each task. We classify the various incentive instruments into three tasks of CEOs: to pursue current financial performance, to invest for future financial performance, and to work on other activities that yield private benefits. The model then suggests that these three incentive indices should be complementary, and the individual incentives within an incentive index should be substitutes. Our empirical examination confirms these predictions. A side product of getting the conditional correlations is to be able to examine the determinants of the three incentive indices. We find that the determination of CEO incentives for current performance is consistent with the risk-incentive tradeoff hypothesis. The determination of managerial discretion is consistent with the incomplete contract literature that control rights should be matched with the party with superior information and ability. There is also evidence that the government uses contract duration to elicit information.

Non-CEO Top Managers’ Monitoring Power and CEO Pay-Performance Sensitivity in State-Owned Enterprises: Evidence from Chinese State-Owned Listed Firms

Do Venture Capitalists Play A Monitoring Role in an Emerging Market? Evidence from the Pay-Performance Relationship of Chinese Entrepreneurial Firms

Effects of CEO Identity on Non-family Managers’ Pay Dispersion in Family Firms: A Social Comparison Perspective

Top executive pay and firm performance in China

Do all CEO pay regulations hurt firm performance? Evidence from China

Corporate Performance Based on Single-index Semi-parametric Methods

Performance Evaluation Mechanism and CEO Turnover——Evidence Based on Different Ultimate Ownership in China's Lasted Firms

Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and State Ownership in China: Evidence from New Panel Data*

On the Director Compensation, CEO Compensation and Firm's Performance

From greed to good: how government regulations of executive compensation impact corporate ESG performance?

Top Managerial Power and Stock Price Efficiency: Evidence from China

Complementarity and Substitutability of CEO Incentives: Theory and Evidence from Chinese State-Owned Enterprises

Political power differential and forced CEO turnover: Evidence from Chinese non‐state‐owned enterprises

Executive political connections and firm performance: Comparative evidence from privately-controlled and state-owned enterprises

Overemployment, Executive Pay-for-performance Sensitivity and Economic Consequences: Evidence from China

Career Concerns, Contract Choice, and “unpaid” Executives

Can the Chinese Two-Tier-Board System Control the Board Chair Pay?

An Investigation of the Transmission Mechanism of Executive Compensation Control to the Operating Performance of State-Owned Listed Companies

A Comparison of CEO Pay-Performance Sensitivity in Privately-Held and Public Firms

Relative Performance Evaluation and Executive Compensation: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies

Political Promotion, CEO Incentives, and the Relationship Between Pay and Performance