Gaining Control by Losing Control

Jawon Kim et al.

The Journal of Industrial Economics2026https://doi.org/10.1111/joie.70019article
AJG 3ABDC A*
Weight
0.50

Abstract

We study an agency model with two sequential tasks, an initial task (e.g., development), which requires unverifiable effort, and a final task (e.g., production), whose environment is privately known only to the agent. The principal can either perform the initial task herself ( hands‐on management ) or delegate it to the agent ( hands‐off management ). We show that when the cost of effort for the initial task is low, hands‐on management is optimal, as it mitigates the distortion caused by agent shirking. However, as the cost of effort increases, hands‐off management becomes preferable. Under hands‐on management, the principal's inability to commit leads her to overinvest in the initial task, which in turn exacerbates inefficiencies in the final task due to the agent's information rent. In contrast, hands‐off management, despite the agent's shirking incentive, helps better target effort toward favorable project environments. Our analysis also reveals how effort costs can create systematic biases toward one management style over the other.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joie.70019

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{jawon2026,
  title        = {{Gaining Control by Losing Control}},
  author       = {Jawon Kim et al.},
  journal      = {The Journal of Industrial Economics},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joie.70019},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Gaining Control by Losing Control

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.