Showing 1 - 8 of 8
Ortner et al. (Manage. Account. Res. 36(1):43–50, 2017) propose the State-Contingent Relative Benefit Cost Allocation Scheme as an incentive system for risky investment decisions. The note at hand reveals the information distribution implicitly assumed within the framework of this study. Based...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011849522
I address the comments made by Ortner (Games 9(4): 93, 2018) in relation to my note “Incentive Systems for Risky Investment Decisions Under Unknown Preferences: Ortner et al. Revisited” (Games 9(2): 26, 2018).
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012014919
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012102243
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012306380
Ortner et al. (Manage. Account. Res. 36(1):43–50, 2017) propose the State-Contingent Relative Benefit Cost Allocation Scheme as an incentive system for risky investment decisions. The note at hand reveals the information distribution implicitly assumed within the framework of this study. Based...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012902215
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011595409
Schosser (Games 2018, 9, 26) claims to have found an alternative solution to design appropriate performance measures than the State-Contingent Relative Benefit Cost Allocation (RBCA) introduced by Ortner et al. (Management Accounting Research 2017, 36, 43–50), which he states is simpler and...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012014918
The paper comments on Khan et al. (J Assoc Inf Syst 18(5):372–402, 2017), who study real option exercise decisions in the context of a single IT project and in a portfolio setting, respectively. The issues identified concern the concept of (economic) rationality and the treatment of project...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013252156