Can We All Get Along? Incentive Contracts to Bridge the Marketing and Operations Divide

Kinshuk Jerath, Serguei Netessine, Z. J. Zhang
{"title":"Can We All Get Along? Incentive Contracts to Bridge the Marketing and Operations Divide","authors":"Kinshuk Jerath, Serguei Netessine, Z. J. Zhang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2319865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The marketing and operations management arms in a firm must work in coordination: marketing efforts to create demand go to waste if supply is suboptimal, and vice versa. However, achieving this coordination has remained a long-standing problem, because in most firms these units are managed in a decentralized manner. A major source of conflict is that marketing compensation is usually heavily weighted towards sales whereas operations compensation is usually heavily weighted towards expense reduction. In this paper, we invoke agency theory to determine compensation plans for sales and operations managers to coordinate their activities in the best interests of the firm. We first show in a single product scenario that, by rewarding the sales manager for increasing sales and the operations manager for reducing total cost, a firm cannot coordinate the two functions. Furthermore, a simple profit-sharing contract does not work, either, because of the free-rider problem. However, we show that each of the following two contract schemes can always achieve coordination: (1) rewarding the operations manager separately for increasing sales and reducing costs, and (2) rewarding him separately for reducing missed sales and leftover supply. We thus show that choosing the right performance metrics (before choosing the contract parameters) can mean the difference between being able to align the interests of the salesforce with those of the firm and not being able to do so. We identify coordination between demand and supply as a new driver of compensation structure and find, for instance, that the sales commission for the sales manager, even in the presence of risk aversion, can increase with uncertainty in demand, a conclusion that runs contrary to results from classic agency theory. In a multiproduct scenario, when one manager manages several products, the coordinating contracts are fairly complicated. However, we show that choosing the right form of workforce allocation: either a sales-focused organization (a separate sales manager for every product, one operations manager for all products) or an operations-focused organization (a separate operations manager for every product, one sales manager for all products) can help a firm to achieve near-perfect coordination. This is in line with the observation that most firms have either a \"sales image\" or a \"cost image,\" and sheds some light on how the underlying objective of aligning marketing and operations, while keeping the size of the salesforce small and compensation contracts simple, can influence the organization of a firm.","PeriodicalId":80976,"journal":{"name":"Comparative labor law journal : a publication of the U.S. National Branch of the International Society for Labor Law and Social Security [and] the Wharton School, and the Law School of the University of Pennsylvania","volume":"100 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative labor law journal : a publication of the U.S. National Branch of the International Society for Labor Law and Social Security [and] the Wharton School, and the Law School of the University of Pennsylvania","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2319865","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

The marketing and operations management arms in a firm must work in coordination: marketing efforts to create demand go to waste if supply is suboptimal, and vice versa. However, achieving this coordination has remained a long-standing problem, because in most firms these units are managed in a decentralized manner. A major source of conflict is that marketing compensation is usually heavily weighted towards sales whereas operations compensation is usually heavily weighted towards expense reduction. In this paper, we invoke agency theory to determine compensation plans for sales and operations managers to coordinate their activities in the best interests of the firm. We first show in a single product scenario that, by rewarding the sales manager for increasing sales and the operations manager for reducing total cost, a firm cannot coordinate the two functions. Furthermore, a simple profit-sharing contract does not work, either, because of the free-rider problem. However, we show that each of the following two contract schemes can always achieve coordination: (1) rewarding the operations manager separately for increasing sales and reducing costs, and (2) rewarding him separately for reducing missed sales and leftover supply. We thus show that choosing the right performance metrics (before choosing the contract parameters) can mean the difference between being able to align the interests of the salesforce with those of the firm and not being able to do so. We identify coordination between demand and supply as a new driver of compensation structure and find, for instance, that the sales commission for the sales manager, even in the presence of risk aversion, can increase with uncertainty in demand, a conclusion that runs contrary to results from classic agency theory. In a multiproduct scenario, when one manager manages several products, the coordinating contracts are fairly complicated. However, we show that choosing the right form of workforce allocation: either a sales-focused organization (a separate sales manager for every product, one operations manager for all products) or an operations-focused organization (a separate operations manager for every product, one sales manager for all products) can help a firm to achieve near-perfect coordination. This is in line with the observation that most firms have either a "sales image" or a "cost image," and sheds some light on how the underlying objective of aligning marketing and operations, while keeping the size of the salesforce small and compensation contracts simple, can influence the organization of a firm.
我们能和睦相处吗?激励合同,以弥合营销和运营的鸿沟
企业的营销和运营管理部门必须协调工作:如果供应不够理想,创造需求的营销努力就会付之一炬,反之亦然。但是,实现这种协调仍然是一个长期存在的问题,因为在大多数公司,这些单位是以分散的方式管理的。冲突的一个主要来源是,营销报酬通常偏重于销售,而运营报酬通常偏重于减少费用。在本文中,我们运用代理理论来确定销售和运营经理的薪酬计划,以协调他们在公司最佳利益下的活动。我们首先在单个产品场景中展示,通过奖励增加销售额的销售经理和降低总成本的运营经理,公司无法协调这两个功能。此外,由于搭便车的问题,简单的利润分享合同也不起作用。然而,我们证明了以下两种合同方案中的每一种都可以实现协调:(1)分别奖励运营经理增加销售和降低成本,(2)分别奖励他减少错过销售和剩余供应。因此,我们表明,选择正确的绩效指标(在选择合同参数之前)可能意味着能够使销售人员的利益与公司的利益保持一致与不能这样做之间的差异。我们将需求和供给之间的协调确定为薪酬结构的新驱动力,并发现,例如,即使存在风险厌恶,销售经理的销售佣金也会随着需求的不确定性而增加,这一结论与经典代理理论的结果相反。在多产品场景中,当一个经理管理多个产品时,协调契约相当复杂。然而,我们表明,选择正确的劳动力分配形式:要么是一个以销售为中心的组织(每个产品都有一个单独的销售经理,一个运营经理负责所有产品),要么是一个以运营为中心的组织(每个产品都有一个单独的运营经理,一个销售经理负责所有产品),可以帮助公司实现近乎完美的协调。这与大多数公司要么有“销售形象”,要么有“成本形象”的观察结果是一致的,并揭示了在保持销售队伍规模小、薪酬合同简单的同时,协调营销和运营的潜在目标如何影响公司的组织结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书