Centralized Hierarchy within a Firm and Decentralized Hierarchy in the Market

Heling Shi and Xiaokai Yang

Introduction

The purpose of the paper is two-fold. First, we develop a general equilibrium model based on corner solutions to simultaneously endogenize four aspects of the division of labor: individu-als' level of specialization, the length of the roundabout production chain, the number of goods in each link of the chain, and the development of the institution of the firm. Second, the equilibrium model is used to endogenize the dividing line between the hierarchical structure of division of labor within the firm and the hierarchical structure of the network of transac-tions in the market.

According to Smith [1776], Young [1928], and Houthakker [1956], there are four as-pects of the division of labor: the level of specialization of individuals, the degree of diversity of professions, the degree of roundaboutness, and the institute of the firm. The first aspect may be related to the degree of specialization at the individual level. The second aspect (di-versity of professions) may concern the horizontal division of labor between professional sectors at the same level in this chain. The third aspect (roundaboutness) may be related to the vertical division of labor between upstream and downstream professional sectors in a long production chain. The fourth aspect (firm) relates the alternative methods in organizing trans-actions required by the division of labor.

Casual observation indicates a positive correlation between the level of specialization, the degree of the roundaboutness of production (or the length of a production chain of round-about productive activities), the variety of available goods, and the development of the institution of the firm in an economy. The number of available goods is small, the degree of production roundaboutness is low, and no firm exists in a less developed and autarkical econ-omy where the level of division of labor and specialization is extremely low and all self-provide goods they need. In contrast, the variety of available goods is great, the degree of production roundaboutness is high, and structures of the firms are sophisticated, in a devel-oped economy with extremely high levels of division of labor. Also, the increase in the roundaboutness is usually associated with the development of the institution of the firm. These concurrent phenomena, which contradict a superficial intuition that entails the counter-action between specialization and product diversity, may relate to some important mechanism that is essential for economics and which has not been well understood by economists. Four recently developed research lines are related to the different aspects of the mechanism in isolation.

The first line was developed by Dixit and Stiglitz [1977], Ethier [1982], Krugman [1981], Judd [1985], Romer [1986], and Grossman and Helpman [1989, 1990]. Their models have endogenized the variety of goods by formulating a tradeoff between the distortions arising from economies of scale and preferences for diverse consumption or economies of complementarity between intermediate goods in producing final goods. The endogenization of the number of consumer goods by employing the CES utility function in Dixit and Stiglitz [1977] and Judd [1985] captures the second aspect of the division of labor at the downstream layer of the hierarchy. Ethier [1982], Romer [1986], and Grossman and Helpman [1990] have endogenized the second aspect of the division of labor at the upstream layer of the hierarchy, using the CES production function. However, their models cannot endogenize the level of specialization for each individual. To endogenize the level of specialization, the degree of self-sufficiency of consumers and the range of production of each individual have to be endogenized. However, the existence of the firm is exogenously given in the models, therefore, they cannot explain the emergence and development of the institution of the firm.
On the other hand, Rosen [1978,1983], Baumgardner [1988], Kim [1989], Locay [1990], Yang [1990], Yang and Wills [1990], Yang and Borland [1991] and Becker and Mur-phy [1992] have endogenized the level of specialization, leaving the number of goods exoge-nously fixed. Yang and Shi [1992] partially remedy this problem by introducing the CES utility function into the Yang [1990] model and endogenizes the level of specialization of individuals and the number of goods. Shi [1994] and Shi and Yang [1995] go one step further to capture the third aspect of the division of labor by endogenizing the number of layers of the hierarchy of goods or the length of production chain in a general equilibrium model.

In an attempt to endogenize the emergence and the development of the institute of the firm, Borland and Yang [1994] and Yang and Ng [1995] apply inframarginal analysis, which implies total benefit-cost analysis across corner solutions in addition to marginal analysis for each corner solution, to dynamic and static general equilibrium models involving the institu-tion of the firm within the new classical framework with consumer-producers, economies of specialization, and transaction costs. They show that as division of labor evolves, the institu-tion of the firm will emerge from the division of labor if transaction efficiency is lower for intermediate goods than that for labor employed to produce these intermediate goods. The function of the asymmetric structure of residual rights is to get the activity with the lowest transaction efficiency involved in the division of labor while avoiding direct pricing and marketing of the activity, such that the division of labor and productivity are promoted. The Yang and Ng [1995] model, which formalizes Coase and Cheung's theory of the firm (Coase [1937] and Cheung [1983]), can explain the emergence of the firm from the division of labor and other endogenously complicated stories in the absence of uncertainties, exogenous com-parative advantages, incomplete contracts, and other exogenous complications. However,their models have not endogenized the number of layers in the hierarchical structure of the division of labor.

As the number of layers of hierarchical structure of the division of labor and the emergence and development of the firm are endogenized, the dividing line between the cen-tralized hierarchy within the firm and the decentralized hierarchy in the market may also be endogenized. The models of centralized hierarchy have been developed by Williamson [1967], Calvo and Wellisz [1979, 1978], Keren and Levhari [1979, 1982, 1989], Rosen [1982], Radner [1992], and Qian [1994]. In these models a decision maker (a manager of a company or a central planner) can choose the number of layers and the number of elements at each layer of the hierarchy. Yang [1994] has developed a model of decentralized hierarchy of wholesale and retail network where no single decision maker can choose the two numbers. In the real world, the centralized hierarchies coexist with the decentralized hierarchies. Some centralized hierarchies within the firm may be part of a large decentralized hierarchy in the market network. The question then is: What mechanism in a general equilibrium model de-termines the structure of the centralized hierarchy within the firm cum the decentralized hierarchy in the market and what are the determinants of the dividing line between centralized and decentralized hierarchies? This question relates not only to the theory of the firm and the literature of vertical integration, but also to the literature of specialization and the division of labor. It is the hierarchical structure of division of labor that sets up a frame for the structure of centralized hierarchy cum decentralized hierarchy of economic organization. Hence, simul-taneous endogenization of the level of division of labor and the structure of centralized hier-archy cum decentralized hierarchy has important implications for economics.

A natural conjecture is that a synthesis of the thinking along these four lines may enable us to decipher the mechanism behind the concurrent increases in specialization, pro-duction roundaboutness, product diversity, and productivity and the emergence of the firm.

In the model to be considered, each individual is a consumer-producer deriving utility from two consumption goods called food and clothes, respectively. Food can be produced out of labor or produced more efficiently out of both labor and tractors. Clothes can be produced out of labor or produced more efficiently out of both labor and a weaving machine. Each individual is endowed with a fixed amount of labor and has a system of production functions for producing 4 producer and consumption goods. There are transaction costs and economies of specialization in producing all goods. The framework generates the tradeoffs among economies of specialization, economies of roundaboutness, and transaction costs.

If transaction efficiency is extremely low, then the gains in introducing more layers of the hierarchy and further horizontal and vertical division of labor are outweighed by transac-tion costs. In this case, each individual will choose autarky, that is, he self-provides all pro-ducer goods and consumer goods. A tradeoff which still exists in autarky is between econo-mies of specialization and economies of roundaboutness. If a large number of producer goods are produced in autarky, a person's level of specialization in producing each good must be low. Thus, in autarky the foregone economies of specialization due to the production of many producer goods at many layers of the hierarchy of goods outweigh the gains to produc-tion roundaboutness. Therefore, in autarky each individual will choose a hierarchy of goods with a small number of layers, so that he can capture more economies of specialization by concentrating his limited labor in a few activities that directly relate to his final consumption. This implies that some sophisticated producer goods based on a large number of layers of the hierarchy are unlikely to exist in autarky. For example, it is likely that only food and clothes will be produced using labor alone but no tractors and weaving machines will be produced in autarky.

If transaction efficiency is extremely high, then people may choose a greater degree of horizontal as well as vertical division of labor and in the meantime maintain each individual's level of specialization at a high level through the division of labor between many differ-ent specialists. Therefore, a high transaction efficiency may elicit some new layers in the hierarchy of goods and new producer goods at each layer in the hierarchy. The emergence of the new layers and new producer goods implies new technology and new industries which are associated with industrialization and endogenous technical progress. Hence, a general equilib-rium model may be used to predict concurrent increases in the number of producer goods at each layer, in the level of specialization, and in the number of layers of the hierarchy of goods.

The high level of division of labor generated by great transaction efficiency can be coordinated either by the goods market or by the labor market. If the transaction cost coeffi-cient for labor is smaller than that for intermediate goods, then the institution of the firm which is associated with the labor market will emerge from a high level of division of labor in producing final and intermediate goods. If an intermediate good is an intangible management service instead of a tangible machine, then a particular structure of ownership of a firm can be used to incorporate the activity with the lowest transaction costs involved in the division of labor, while avoiding direct pricing and marketing of the activity. We will show that the number of producer goods at each layer and the number of layers of the hierarchy of goods increase as transaction efficiency is improved. If many intangible intermediate services are involved in the division of labor and each of these needs a type of firm to indirectly price its input and output, then the hierarchical structure of the division of labor will be organized by several separate simple centralized hierarchies within the firm. The centralized hierarchies will be connected together by a decentralized hierarchy of network of transactions in the market. If all roundabout productive activities emerging from a high level of division of labor are tangible and have a small transaction cost coefficient in the market for goods, compared to that of the market for labor, then centralized hierarchies within the firm are not needed.

Therefore the hierarchical structure of the division of labor will be organized by a completely decentralized hierarchy of transactions in the market place. Hence, the relative transaction cost coefficient of goods to labor determines where the equilibrium dividing line is between the centralized hierarchy within the firm and the decentralized hierarchy in the market place.

In section 2, a model with consumer-producers, increasing returns to specialization, and transaction costs is specified. Section 3 investigates individuals' decisions and equilib-rium. Section 4 uses two types of comparative static analysis to investigate the evolution of economic structures and the emergence of the institution of the firm. The final section con-cludes the paper.

Download

 

Inframarginal Econimics Society www.inframarginal.com

 

© INFRAMARGINAL ECONOMICS --- ALL RIGHT RESERVED