X-inefficiency

Last updated

X-inefficiency is a concept used in economics to describe instances where firms go through internal inefficiency resulting in higher production costs than required for a given output. This inefficiency is a result of various factors such as outdated technology, Inefficient production processes, poor management and lack of competition resulting in lower profits and higher prices for consumers. The concept of X-inefficiency was introduced by Harvey Leibenstein.

Contents

The difference between the potential and actual cost is known as X-Inefficiency. In normal instances, a firm could have an average cost curve at "Potential AC", however due to inefficiency, its actual average costs are higher. X inefficiencyd63.jpg
The difference between the potential and actual cost is known as X-Inefficiency. In normal instances, a firm could have an average cost curve at "Potential AC", however due to inefficiency, its actual average costs are higher.

The difference between the potential and actual cost is known as X-Inefficiency. In normal instances, a firm could have an average cost curve at potential AC, however due to inefficiency, its actual average costs are higher.

in 1966, Harvard University Professor Harvey Leibenstein first introduced the concept of X-inefficiency in his paper "Allocative Efficiency vs. X- Efficiency", which was published in American Economic Review . X-Inefficiency refers to a firm's inability to fully utilize its resources, resulting in an output level that falls short of the maximum potential achievable given the resources and environment which is referred to as the efficiency frontier.

More so, X-inefficiency focuses on the importance of competition and innovation in promoting efficiency and reducing costs for firms, followed by higher profits and better output and prices for consumers.

X-inefficiency pin out irrational actions performed by firms in the market.

Overview

The difference between the actual and minimum cost of production for a given output produces X-inefficiency. [1]

Companies will incur X-Inefficiency as a result of lack of motivation to control its costs, which brings the average cost of production exceeds costs actually required for production. For example, the company have a potential potential cost curve. However, due to the lack incentive to motivate on control costs, the company's actual cost curve is at a higher position compared to the potential cost curve. [2]

The phenomenon of X-inefficiency is in relation to the allocation of effort, especially the managerial effort. [3]

Mainstream economic theory tends to assume that the management of firms act to maximize profit by minimizing the inputs used to produce a given level of output. [4]

Competition energizes firms to seek productive efficiency gains and produce at lowest unit costs or risk losing sales to more efficient rivals. With market forms other than perfect competition, such as monopoly, productive inefficiency can persist, because the lack of competition makes it possible to use inefficient production techniques and still stay in business. In addition to monopoly, sociologists have identified a number of ways in which markets may be organizationally embedded, and thus may depart in behavior from economic theory. [5]

Organizational slack occurs when firms opt to employ more resources than are needed to produce a given level of output. Unused capacity results in X-inefficiency. Organizational slack can be explained by the principal-agent problem. In companies ownership and management are separate. Shareholders (the principal) elect directors (the agent) to act on their behalf and maximize shareholder value. Managers may take decisions that maximize their own and not shareholder objectives e.g. hiring extra staff to reduce manager workloads. This increases unit costs.

X-inefficiency only looks at the outputs that are produced with given inputs. It doesn't take account of whether the inputs are the best ones to be using, or whether the outputs are the best ones to be producing. For example, a firm that employs brain surgeons to dig ditches might still be X-efficient, even though reallocating the brain surgeons to curing the sick would be more efficient for society overall. In this sense, X-inefficiency focuses on productive efficiency and minimising costs rather than allocative efficiency and maximising welfare. For more extensive discussions, see Sickles and Zelenyuk (2019, p. 1-8, 469) and references therein. [6]

Arguments about X-inefficiency

Based on the assumption that the non-trade output of the firm is zero, Leibenstein argues that the X-inefficiency results from the lack of motivation of the resource owners to produce less than the maximum technical output of the trade goods. [7] Leibenstein also argued that sometimes firms are not maximising their profits because there may be a certain level of efficiency, considering the human element which introduced by Leibenstein [8]

Causes to X-inefficiency

Monopoly Effect - A monopoly is a price maker in that its choice of output level affects the price paid by consumers. Consequently, a monopoly tends to price at a point where price is greater than long-run average costs. X-inefficiency, however tends to increase average costs causing further divergence from the economically efficient outcome. The sources of X-inefficiency have been ascribed to things such as over investment and empire building by managers, lack of motivation stemming from a lack of competition, and pressure by labor unions to pay above-market wages. [9]

Suggested by Bergsman, The sum of X-inefficiency and monopoly returns is much larger than costs of mis-allocation.

In reality, industries with strong monopoly capacity will be more restricted by legal regulations. These regulations can impose competitive pressure on companies and prevent the industry turning into a true monopoly. Meanwhile, these artificial pressure of regulations can induce competitive pressure to companies, thus improving X-inefficiency. [9]

When a particular market lacks competition, companies that are monopoly would have incentive to increase their prices to in order to make super-profits. In addition, the low pressure from having no competition would lead to difficulty controlling costs resulting in potential inefficiencies. [9]

Government Effect - A state owned firm may not be operating to make profit, therefore it would have no incentive to cut costs.

Principal Agent Effect- Shareholders typically have a primary goal of maximizing profits and reducing costs, managers and employees may opt to have different priorities for example they may seek to keep costs low up to a point of maintaining job security, but allow costs to increase if it means improving the quality of their work experience. [9]

Motivation Effect- Workers and managers may be demotivated to work diligently. This arises from various factors such as strained industrial relations, As a result employees may purposefully take extended breaks and not exert their best effort in order to increase profitability. [9]

Measurements of X-inefficiency

Cost Efficiency Analysis - To analyze the efficiency of firms or organizations in a particular industry or sector, a technique called cost frontier analysis is utilized. This involves approximating the minimum cost required to produce a specific level of output, which serves as the cost frontier. Companies that incur costs exceeding the frontier are deemed inefficient. Statistical methods are utilized in cost frontier analysis to estimate the frontier and gauge the extent of inefficiency within the firms. [10]

Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) - is a technique that does not rely on assumptions or preset parameters, and is used to assess the relative effectiveness of companies or groups. It evaluates how well firms use various inputs and outputs, and determines the highest level of efficiency attainable with the available resources. Ineffective firms are those that do not achieve this maximum level of efficiency. [11]

Stochastic frontier analysis : - is a method that requires the estimation of a production function that focuses the unpredictable fluctuations in both inputs and outputs. The resulting result is then utilized to determined the efficiency of individual firms. When using this approach, any company that operates below the estimated level of efficiency is considered inefficient. [12]

Solutions of X-inefficiency

Government Regulation - Rules and regulations set by the government on firms can enhance market efficiency. Studies by Sappington and Stiglitz (1987) show that regulations can address market failures such as information asymmetry, externalities and natural monopolies thus reducing x-inefficiency. [13] Removing Barriers to entry for new companies can force existing companies to operate more efficiently to stay competitive. [14]

Antitrust Laws - The main goal of antitrust laws is to foster competitions and hinder the establishment of monopolies. In their paper, Hovenkamp et al. (2011), examine the function of antitrust laws in advancing economic effectiveness through the deterrence of anti-competitive actions, including but not limited to, price-fixing, bid-rigging, and exclusive dealing. [15]

Some solutions to X-inefficiency include increasing competition in the market, implementing better management practices, and improving employee motivation and training. Implementing better management practices aid in the reducing x-inefficiency. For example lean management method concentrate on minimizing waste and increasing efficiency. Technology plays an important role in streamlining processes and lowering labor expense. [14]

Another Approach of minimizing x-inefficiency involves Management input. Enhancing employee motivation and training - to help employees acquire the expertise and knowledge for optimal performance, can lower wastage, improve efficiency and productivity. Companies could offer rewards and incentives to employees that bring new innovative manufacturing process aimed at boosting efficiency and reducing waste. [14]

Conclusion

In conclusion, X-inefficiency refers to the inefficiencies within a company that result in higher production costs than necessary for a given output. These inefficiencies can stem from a variety of factors, including outdated technology, inefficient production processes, poor management, and a lack of competition. X-inefficiency underscores the importance of competition and innovation in fostering efficiency, which can reduce costs for companies, resulting in increased profits and better output and prices for consumers. However, X-inefficiency only focuses on productive efficiency and minimizing costs, not on allocative efficiency and maximizing welfare. Industries with strong monopolistic power, government-owned firms, and principal-agent problems are particularly prone to X-inefficiency. By addressing these underlying causes, firms can enhance efficiency and lower costs, which can benefit both the firm and the broader economy.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economies of scale</span> Cost advantages obtained via scale of operation

In microeconomics, economies of scale are the cost advantages that enterprises obtain due to their scale of operation, and are typically measured by the amount of output produced per unit of time. A decrease in cost per unit of output enables an increase in scale. At the basis of economies of scale, there may be technical, statistical, organizational or related factors to the degree of market control. This is just a partial description of the concept.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Microeconomics</span> Behavior of individuals and firms

Microeconomics is a branch of mainstream economics that studies the behavior of individuals and firms in making decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources and the interactions among these individuals and firms. Microeconomics focuses on the study of individual markets, sectors, or industries as opposed to the national economy as whole, which is studied in macroeconomics.

A monopoly, as described by Irving Fisher, is a market with the "absence of competition", creating a situation where a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular thing. This contrasts with a monopsony which relates to a single entity's control of a market to purchase a good or service, and with oligopoly and duopoly which consists of a few sellers dominating a market. Monopolies are thus characterised by a lack of economic competition to produce the good or service, a lack of viable substitute goods, and the possibility of a high monopoly price well above the seller's marginal cost that leads to a high monopoly profit. The verb monopolise or monopolize refers to the process by which a company gains the ability to raise prices or exclude competitors. In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with a decrease in social surplus. Although monopolies may be big businesses, size is not a characteristic of a monopoly. A small business may still have the power to raise prices in a small industry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monopolistic competition</span> Imperfect competition of differentiated products that are not perfect substitutes

Monopolistic competition is a type of imperfect competition such that there are many producers competing against each other, but selling products that are differentiated from one another and hence are not perfect substitutes. In monopolistic competition, a company takes the prices charged by its rivals as given and ignores the impact of its own prices on the prices of other companies. If this happens in the presence of a coercive government, monopolistic competition will fall into government-granted monopoly. Unlike perfect competition, the company maintains spare capacity. Models of monopolistic competition are often used to model industries. Textbook examples of industries with market structures similar to monopolistic competition include restaurants, cereals, clothing, shoes, and service industries in large cities. The "founding father" of the theory of monopolistic competition is Edward Hastings Chamberlin, who wrote a pioneering book on the subject, Theory of Monopolistic Competition (1933). Joan Robinson published a book The Economics of Imperfect Competition with a comparable theme of distinguishing perfect from imperfect competition. Further work on monopolistic competition was undertaken by Dixit and Stiglitz who created the Dixit-Stiglitz model which has proved applicable used in the sub fields of international trade theory, macroeconomics and economic geography.

In economics, specifically general equilibrium theory, a perfect market, also known as an atomistic market, is defined by several idealizing conditions, collectively called perfect competition, or atomistic competition. In theoretical models where conditions of perfect competition hold, it has been demonstrated that a market will reach an equilibrium in which the quantity supplied for every product or service, including labor, equals the quantity demanded at the current price. This equilibrium would be a Pareto optimum.

This aims to be a complete article list of economics topics:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Profit maximization</span> Process to determine the highest profits for a firm

In economics, profit maximization is the short run or long run process by which a firm may determine the price, input and output levels that will lead to the highest possible total profit. In neoclassical economics, which is currently the mainstream approach to microeconomics, the firm is assumed to be a "rational agent" which wants to maximize its total profit, which is the difference between its total revenue and its total cost.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to industrial organization:

Efficiency is the often measurable ability to avoid wasting materials, energy, efforts, money, and time while performing a task. In a more general sense, it is the ability to do things well, successfully, and without waste.

In economics, the marginal cost is the change in the total cost that arises when the quantity produced is incremented, the cost of producing additional quantity. In some contexts, it refers to an increment of one unit of output, and in others it refers to the rate of change of total cost as output is increased by an infinitesimal amount. As Figure 1 shows, the marginal cost is measured in dollars per unit, whereas total cost is in dollars, and the marginal cost is the slope of the total cost, the rate at which it increases with output. Marginal cost is different from average cost, which is the total cost divided by the number of units produced.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Production–possibility frontier</span> Visualization of all possible options of output for a two-good economy

In microeconomics, a production–possibility frontier (PPF), production possibility curve (PPC), or production possibility boundary (PPB) is a graphical representation showing all the possible options of output for two goods that can be produced using all factors of production, where the given resources are fully and efficiently utilized per unit time. A PPF illustrates several economic concepts, such as allocative efficiency, economies of scale, opportunity cost, productive efficiency, and scarcity of resources.

Allocative efficiency is a state of the economy in which production is aligned with consumer preferences; in particular, the set of outputs is chosen so as to maximize the wellbeing of society. This is achieved if every good or service is produced up until the last unit provides a marginal benefit to consumers equal to the marginal cost of production.

Managerial economics is a branch of economics involving the application of economic methods in the organizational decision-making process. Economics is the study of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. Managerial economics involves the use of economic theories and principles to make decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources. It guides managers in making decisions relating to the company's customers, competitors, suppliers, and internal operations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Isoquant</span> Contour line in microeconomics

An isoquant, in microeconomics, is a contour line drawn through the set of points at which the same quantity of output is produced while changing the quantities of two or more inputs. The x and y axis on an isoquant represent two relevant inputs, which are usually a factor of production such as labour, capital, land, or organisation. An isoquant may also be known as an “Iso-Product Curve”, or an “Equal Product Curve”.

The theory of the firm consists of a number of economic theories that explain and predict the nature of the firm, company, or corporation, including its existence, behaviour, structure, and relationship to the market. Firms are key drivers in economics, providing goods and services in return for monetary payments and rewards. Organisational structure, incentives, employee productivity, and information all influence the successful operation of a firm in the economy and within itself. As such major economic theories such as Transaction cost theory, Managerial economics and Behavioural theory of the firm will allow for an in-depth analysis on various firm and management types.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Productive efficiency</span> When one must decrease production of one good to increase another in an economy

In microeconomic theory, productive efficiency is a situation in which the economy or an economic system operating within the constraints of current industrial technology cannot increase production of one good without sacrificing production of another good. In simple terms, the concept is illustrated on a production possibility frontier (PPF), where all points on the curve are points of productive efficiency. An equilibrium may be productively efficient without being allocatively efficient — i.e. it may result in a distribution of goods where social welfare is not maximized.

A bilateral monopoly is a market structure consisting of both a monopoly and a monopsony.

Stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) is a method of economic modeling. It has its starting point in the stochastic production frontier models simultaneously introduced by Aigner, Lovell and Schmidt (1977) and Meeusen and Van den Broeck (1977).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Profit (economics)</span> Concept in economics

In economics, profit is the difference between revenue that an economic entity has received from its outputs and total costs of its inputs, also known as surplus value. It is equal to total revenue minus total cost, including both explicit and implicit costs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monopoly price</span> Aspect of monopolistic markets

In microeconomics, a monopoly price is set by a monopoly. A monopoly occurs when a firm lacks any viable competition and is the sole producer of the industry's product. Because a monopoly faces no competition, it has absolute market power and can set a price above the firm's marginal cost.

References

  1. Leibenstein, H (1978). "On the basic proposition of x-efficiency theory". American Economic Review. 68 (2): 328–332. JSTOR   1816715.
  2. Leibenstein, Harvey; Maital, Shlomo (May 1994). "The organizational foundations of X-inefficiency: A game-theoretic interpretation of Argyris' model of organizational learning". Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 23 (3): 251–268. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(94)90001-9. ISSN   0167-2681.
  3. P., MARTIN, John. X-Inefficiency, Managerial Effort and Protection. OCLC   1192671818.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. Yannelis, Nicholas (2008). Economic Theory.{{cite journal}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  5. "X-inefficiency". Policonomics. 30 November 2012. Retrieved 2018-01-11.
  6. Sickles, R., & Zelenyuk, V. (2019). Measurement of Productivity and Efficiency: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781139565981
  7. STIGLER, G. J (1976). "The Xistence of X-Efficiency". American Economic Review. 66 (1): 213–216. JSTOR   1804963.
  8. Leibenstein, Harvey (1966). Allocative efficiency vs."x-efficiency.". Univ.of California, Inst.of Industrial Relations. OCLC   500398276.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 "X Inefficiency". Economics Help. January 2021. Retrieved 2023-04-24.
  10. Battese, G. E.; Coelli, T. J. (1995-06-01). "A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data". Empirical Economics. 20 (2): 325–332. doi:10.1007/BF01205442. ISSN   1435-8921. S2CID   18411518.
  11. Australia. Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision (1997). Data envelopment analysis: a technique for measuring the efficiency of government service delivery. Australia. Industry Commission. Melbourne: Industry Commission. ISBN   0-646-33533-2. OCLC   38836394.
  12. Kumbhakar, Subal (2000). Stochastic frontier analysis. C. A. Knox Lovell. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press. ISBN   0-521-48184-8. OCLC   41315556.
  13. Sappington, David E. M.; Stiglitz, Joseph E. (1987). "Privatization, Information and Incentives". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 6 (4): 567–582. doi:10.2307/3323510. ISSN   0276-8739. JSTOR   3323510. S2CID   154531463.
  14. 1 2 3 Baumol, William J. (2010). The Microtheory of Innovative Entrepreneurship (Student ed.). Princeton University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctt21668j9. ISBN   978-0-691-14584-6. JSTOR   j.ctt21668j9.
  15. Hovenkamp, Herbert. "Antitrust and Platform Monopoly" (PDF). The Yale Law Journal.