Avoiding non-optimal management decisions by applying a three-person inspection game

An inspection game models a conflict situation between an inspector and an inspectee. The mathematical analysis aims to generate optimal behavior of the inspectee under the assumption that an undesirable action of the inspectee could otherwise be carried out strategically. In this paper the controller’s (inspector’s) particular job is to audit a manager’s (inspectee’s) decision and to submit a report to the company’s top managers for examination. Thus, a conflict as regards the choice of behavioral actions of the manager, the controller and the top management impends. Based on Fandel and Trockel (2011a) this modified inspection game is discussed here for the first time as a three-person game in the context of a manager’s faulty decision that will unnecessarily add to the company’s costs and that the top management understandably wishes to minimize. We will first examine the conditions under which a Nash equilibrium occurs in this three-person game in which poor management, poor monitoring and poor revision coincide. We will then examine the effects that the penalties and bonuses exert on the Nash equilibrium solution. We will find that penalties and bonuses can neutralize each other in their effects on the improved decision making by the manager and the controller.

► We model a three-person inspection game in management.
► We analyze the three-person inspection game, which has a unique Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies.
► Increasing the penalty for both the controller and manager is not beneficial, as both parameters work in opposition.
► If the bonus for the manager is increased, the probability of his decision will increase which minimizes costs for the company.