Abstract
This paper shows how the fear of signaling distrust can endogenously lead to incomplete contractual agreements. According to standard results in contract theory an optimal incentive contract should be conditional on all verifiable information containing statistical information about an agent's action or type. Most real world contracts, however, condition only on few contingencies and often no explicit contract is signed at all. This paper argues that the proposal of a sophisticated complete contract including fines for misbehavior and other explicit incentives signals distrust to the partner. A trustworthy partner would choose the desired action anyway. Insisting on explicit contractual incentives thus means that the partner's trustworthiness is called into question. Thus if it is important for the relation that an agent believes to be trusted, a principal may prefer to leave a contract incomplete rather than to signal her distrust by proposing a complete contract.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.