Suchergebnisse

This research examines the structure of the military labor market and the potential consequences of using family-friendly compensation practices to address recruiting and retention concerns. The limited opportunities for lateral entry into the military lead human resource managers to fill leadership positions from within. Dynamic considerations force recruiters to focus on young high school graduates and emphasize the benefits of a career in military service, which include an allowance system that rewards family status. Controlling for important demographic characteristics, military personnel are more likely to be married and have children than their civilian counterparts. The implications of this finding depend on the costs of family support programs and differences in performance between soldiers with and without dependents. This case highlights the difficulties that arise when government organizations are forced to compete with the private sector for labor and use social incentives as a means to attract persons into public service.

Abstract
This article analyzes voter mobilization and interest group activity within a citizen-candidate model. Interest groups influence the decisions of 'high cost' voters by running a 'get out the vote' campaign. Membership fees paid by citizens joining an interest group finance the vote drives. Because citizens choose whether to join an interest group, size is an endogenous feature of equilibrium outcomes. In contrast to the existing literature, it is shown that smaller groups may have greater influence. Importantly, this result does not depend on the ability of smaller groups to overcome the free rider problem. Intuitively, because smaller groups may have a less diverse membership, they can advocate more extreme policy outcomes. An interest group's influence is shown to depend on voting costs and the separation between candidate positions. The presence of multiple interest groups mitigates an interest's influence, resulting in inefficiency.

This article develops a citizen-candidate model with sequential elections. The model highlights the strategic considerations associated with the primary process, which hinge on the preferences of party members, in particular the party medians and the party boundaries. It is shown that although electoral competition leads to convergence in platforms, the primary process limits such convergence. Intuitively, this results from candidates having to please two different sets of citizens in successive races (party members in the primary and the electorate as a whole in the general election).

Using a two stage rent-seeking framework, we present a simple model of strategic entry/terrorism deterrence and test the model using laboratory experiments. Our contest success function highlights the potential for strategic spillovers. The theory illustrates that, relative to a cooperative outcome, negative externalities lead to over-spending on deterrence and positive externalities lead to under-spending on deterrence. Our experimental results are broadly consistent; subjects in the negative externality treatment had higher expenditures. In contrast to theoretical predictions, participation decisions, while primarily driven by the probability of winning a contest, were influenced by a subject's ability to participate in multiple contests. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThis paper examines the behavior in multilateral bargaining experiments with alternating offers and asymmetric information. In all experiments, a single buyer has up to ten bargaining periods to purchase one unit of a good from each of two sellers. Treatments vary based on who makes the first offer (buyer or sellers), timing (consistent buyer-offer/sellers-demand or alternating), and information (buyer's value and sellers' costs are known or come from a uniform distribution). We find that actual bargaining outcomes are virtually identical when offers alternate, regardless of which player makes the first offer. We find that alternating offers reduce bargaining delay slightly compared to treatments in which one side or the other makes repeated take-it-or-leave-it offers. Finally, we find that incomplete information increases bargaining delay and the likelihood of failed agreements.