ABSTRACT: In a setting in which corporate headquarters dictates total sales targets, we study how supervisors allocate sales targets to individual stores. Specifically, we analyze whether supervisors strategically use discretion in the target-setting process to address compensation contracting issues. We first examine whether supervisors use discretion to manage compensation risk. The results are consistent with the agency-theoretic prediction that supervisors provide easier targets to stores facing higher levels of store-specific risk. Next, we examine whether discretion is used to mitigate fairness concerns. The results suggest that, consistent with behavioral arguments, supervisors use discretion to deal with fairness issues, even if the area of the supervisor’s discretion is not the source of the fairness concerns. Finally, we analyze whether supervisors use discretion in the target-setting process to reduce their potential confrontation costs. Consistent with research in psychology, we find that supervisors provide easier targets to store managers with relatively higher hierarchical status.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 November 2010
Research Article|
November 01 2010
Supervisor Discretion in Target Setting: An Empirical Investigation Available to Purchase
Jasmijn C. Bol;
Jasmijn C. Bol
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
Search for other works by this author on:
Timothy M. Keune;
Timothy M. Keune
University of South Carolina
Search for other works by this author on:
Ella Mae Matsumura;
Ella Mae Matsumura
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Search for other works by this author on:
Jae Yong Shin
Jae Yong Shin
Seoul National University
Search for other works by this author on:
Online ISSN: 1558-7967
Print ISSN: 0001-4826
American Accounting Association
2010
The Accounting Review (2010) 85 (6): 1861–1886.
Citation
Jasmijn C. Bol, Timothy M. Keune, Ella Mae Matsumura, Jae Yong Shin; Supervisor Discretion in Target Setting: An Empirical Investigation. The Accounting Review 1 November 2010; 85 (6): 1861–1886. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2010.85.6.1861
Download citation file:
Pay-Per-View Access
$25.00