pdf - Nyenrode Business Universiteit
pdf - Nyenrode Business Universiteit
pdf - Nyenrode Business Universiteit
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
110 CHAPTER 4. OPPORTUNISM MITIGATION EFFECTIVENESS<br />
an econometric problem that leads to biased and inconsistent estimators within equations<br />
used to test theoretical propositions. This bias renders inferences problematic and consequently<br />
reduces the confidence in the conclusions drawn from the research (Chenhall &<br />
Moers 2007). Thus, endogeneity can cause the null-findings of the presented analyses. I<br />
partially mitigate this problem in the models presented in the preceding sections by including<br />
the effect of information asymmetry, mediated by RPE use, on room for managerial<br />
opportunism, because information asymmetry can influence both RPE use and room for<br />
managerial opportunism simultaneously. Additionally, I conduct a robustness check on the<br />
models analyses to address the issue of potential remaining endogeneity with a Hausman<br />
test. Endogeneity is assessed for both RPE measures (RPE-Use and RPE-based-Targets).<br />
However, as the procedure and the results are similar for both RPE measures, only the<br />
test for the primary RPE measure (RPE-Use) is described in this section.<br />
Antonakis et al. (2010) recommend the Hausman test to assess endogeneity problems in<br />
SEM. The Hausman statistic is computed by conducting two OLS regressions after one<br />
another. The first regression predicts RPE-Use based on one or more instrumental variables,<br />
and all other variables in the original equation. The instrumental variable(s) should<br />
correlate with RPE-Use, but not with the error term of the structural model (Larcker &<br />
Rusticus 2010). The second regression includes the original (observed) RPE-Use measure,<br />
the predicted RPE-Use measure from the first stage and the original independent variables.<br />
The Hausman test assesses the significance of the predicted RPE-Use in the second<br />
regression.<br />
Proper instrumental variables should be both relevant (i.e., they should be related to the<br />
endogenous explanatory variable RPE use) and exogenous (i.e., they should be unrelated<br />
to the undefined residual of room for managerial opportunism). In my analyses, I select<br />
one instrumental variable from the questionnaire that I associate with RPE use. This item<br />
asks to what extent peer performance is a point of reference for the respondent’s superior<br />
when evaluating the HR function in the respondent’s business unit. Whereas RPE use<br />
refers to the performance evaluation of the business unit manager, the questionnaire item<br />
focuses on the general assessment of a smaller organizational part. Still, both RPE use and<br />
the selected questionnaire item relate to some kind of peer comparison for the evaluation<br />
of organizational parts. Therefore, I believe that the selected questionnaire item is related<br />
to RPE use and that it is a relevant instrumental variable.<br />
Arguing why an instrumental variable is exogenous, is, however, problematic in most research,<br />
because it requires one to demonstrate that an instrumental variable is not associated<br />
with the undefined structural residual. However, what researchers can do instead is to<br />
try to find reasons that falsify this association’s non-existence. To the best of my ability,<br />
I could not find a theoretical argument for how the use of peer performance as a point<br />
of reference for the evaluation of the HR function is related to the structural residual of