Timing of Verification Procedures: Monitoring versus Auditing

Roland Strausz

Departmental Working Papers

Abstract: In an agency model this paper studies the strategic effect of a difference in timing of verification. A principal may choose between two equally efficient verification procedures: monitoring and auditing. Under auditing the principal receives additional information. Due to a double moral hazard problem there exists a tension between incentives for effort and incentives for verification. Auditing exacerbates this tension and, consequently, requires steeper incentive schemes than monitoring. Hence, auditing is suboptimal if 1) steep incentives structures are costly to implement due to bounded transfers, or 2) steep incentive schemes induce higher rents due to limited liability.

References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/%7Elsbester/papers/dp2002_02.pdf (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 403 Forbidden

Related works:
Journal Article: Timing of verification procedures: Monitoring versus auditing (2006)
Working Paper: Timing of Verification Procedures: Monitoring versus Auditing (2005)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bef:lsbest:015

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Departmental Working Papers
Bibliographic data for series maintained by XXX ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).