×

Measurement of control power in corporate networks. (English) Zbl 1489.90009

Summary: This paper discusses some game-theoretical methods for measuring indirect control in complex corporate shareholding networks. The methods use power indices to estimate the direct and indirect control in shareholding structures. Some of these methods only estimate the control power of investors (firms without shareholdings), and only a few measure the control power of all firms involved in shareholding networks (which means investors and stock companies). None of them takes measuring the importance of mutual connections (edges in the networks) into consideration; thus we focus in particular on an extension of these methods in this paper to measure both the control-power of the firms involved in complex shareholding structures (represented by nodes in networks) and the importance (power) of linkages between the firms as elements of a whole corporate shareholding network. More precisely, we apply our approaches to a theoretical example of a corporate network. Moreover, we continue the considerations about reasonable properties for indirect control measurement. Some ideas of new properties are proposed. The paper also provides a brief review of the literature concerning the topic.

MSC:

90B10 Deterministic network models in operations research
91A80 Applications of game theory

References:

[1] ÁLVAREZ-MOZOS M., FERREIRA F., ALONSO-MEIJIDE J.M., PINTO A.A., Characterizations of power indices based on null player free winning coalitions, Optimization, 2015, 64 (3), 675-686, DOI: 10.1080/02331934.2012.756878. · Zbl 1307.91015 · doi:10.1080/02331934.2012.756878
[2] BANZHAF J.F., Weighted voting doesn’t work: a mathematical analysis, Rutgers Law Rev., 1965, 19 (2), 317-343.
[3] BARUA R., CHAKRAVARTY S.R., ROY S., On the Coleman indices of voting power, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2006, 171 (1), 273-289, DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.07.064. · Zbl 1143.91318 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.07.064
[4] BERLE A., MEANS G., The modern corporation and private property, Commerce Clearing House, New York 1932.
[5] BERTINI C., FREIXAS J., GAMBARELLI G., STACH I., Comparing power indices, Int. Game Theory Rev., 2013, 15 (2), 1340004-1-1340004-19. · Zbl 1274.91037
[6] BERTINI C., MERCIK J., STACH I., Indirect control and power, Oper. Res. Dec., 2016, 26 (2), 7-30, DOI: 10.5277/ord160202. · doi:10.5277/ord160202
[7] BERTINI C., STACH I., Banzhaf voting power measure, [In:] K. Dowding (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Power, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles 2011, 54-55.
[8] BERTINI C., STACH I., On public values and power indices, Dec. Making Manuf. Serv., 2015, 9 (1), 9-25, DOI: 10.7494/dmms.2015.9.1.9. · Zbl 1414.91137 · doi:10.7494/dmms.2015.9.1.9
[9] BORM P., OWEN G., TIJS S., On the position value for communication situations, SIAM J. Discrete Math., 1992, 5, 305-320. · Zbl 0788.90087
[10] BRAMS S.J., Game theory and politics, Free Press, New York 1975.
[11] CRAMA Y., LERUTH L., Control and voting power in corporate networks: concepts and computational aspects, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2007, 178, 879-893, DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.02.020. · Zbl 1163.90395 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.02.020
[12] CRAMA Y., LERUTH L., Power indices and the measurement of control in corporate structures, Int. Game Theory Rev., 2013, 15 (3), 1-15, DOI: 10.1142/S0219198913400173. · Zbl 1275.91142 · doi:10.1142/S0219198913400173
[13] DEEGAN J., PACKEL E.W., To the (minimal winning) victors go the (equally divided) spoils: a new power index for simple n-person games, [In:] S.J. Brams, W.F. Lucas, P.D. Straffin (Eds)., Political and related models. Modules in applied mathematics, Springer, New York 1983, DOI: /10.1007/978-1-4612-5430-0_10. · Zbl 0515.90084 · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-5430-0_10
[14] DERKS J., HALLER H., Null players out? Linear values for games with variable supports, Int. Game Theory Rev., 1999, 1, 301-314. · Zbl 1045.91502
[15] DUBEY P., SHAPLEY L., Mathematical properties of the Banzhaf power index, Math. Oper. Res., 1979, 4 (2), 99-131. · Zbl 0409.90008
[16] FELSENTHAL D., MACHOVER M., Postulates and paradoxes of relative voting power. A critical reap-praisal, Theory Dec., 1995, 38, 195-229. · Zbl 0827.90037
[17] FELSENTHAL D.S., MACHOVER M., The measurement of voting power. Theory and practice, problems and paradoxes, Edward Elgar Publishers, London 1998. · Zbl 0954.91019
[18] FORLICZ S., MERCIK J., RAMSEY D., STACH I., The Shapley value for multigraphs, [In:] N.T. Nguyen, E. Pimenidis, Z. Khan, B. Trawiński (Eds.), Comp. Coll. Int. LNAI, Vol. 11056, 10th International Conference, ICCCI 2018, Bristol, UK, September 5-7, 2018, Part II, 213-221, Springer, Cham 2018, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-98446-9_20. · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-98446-9_20
[19] FREIXAS J., MARCINIAK D., PONS M., On the ordinal equivalence of the Johnston, Banzhaf and Shapley power indices, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2012, 216 (2), 367-375. · Zbl 1237.91025
[20] GAMBARELLI G., OWEN G., Indirect control of corporations, Int. J. Game Theory, 1994, 23, 287-302. · Zbl 0815.90140
[21] HU X., SHAPLEY L.S., On authority distributions in organizations: controls, Games Econ. Beh., 2003, 45, 153-170. · Zbl 1071.91006
[22] HU X., SHAPLEY L.S., On authority distributions in organizations: equilibrium, Games Econ. Beh., 2003, 45, 132-152. · Zbl 1054.91011
[23] JOHNSTON R.J., On the measurement of power. Some reactions to Laver, Environ. Plan. A, 1978, 10 (8), 907-914, DOI: 10.1068/a100907. · doi:10.1068/a100907
[24] KAROS D., PETERS H., Indirect control and power in mutual control structures, Games Econ. Beh., 2015, 92, 150-165, DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2015.06.003. · Zbl 1356.91008 · doi:10.1016/j.geb.2015.06.003
[25] KILGOUR D.M., A Shapley value analysis for cooperative games with quarrelling, [In:] A. Rapoport (Ed.), Game theory as a theory of conflict resolution, D. Reidel, Dordrecht 1974, 193-206.
[26] KOŁODZIEJ M., STACH I., Control sharing analysis and simulation, [In:] T. Sawik (Ed.), 13th Interna-tional Conference on Industrial Logistics, ICIL 2016, Zakopane, Poland, AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow 2016, 101-108.
[27] LARUELLE A., On the choice of a power index, Working Papers AD 1999-20, 1999, Instituto Valen-ciano de Investigaciones Económicas (Ivie).
[28] LEECH D., Shareholder voting power and ownership control of companies, Homo Oecon., 2002, 19, 345-371, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-35929-3_25. · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35929-3_25
[29] LEVY M., SZAFARZ A., Cross-ownership: a device for management entrenchment?, Review of Finance, 2017, 21 (4), 1675-1699, DOI: 10.1093/rof/rfw009. · Zbl 1402.91876 · doi:10.1093/rof/rfw009
[30] MEESSEN R., Communication games, Master’s thesis, Dept. of Mathematics, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 1988 (In Dutch).
[31] MERCIK J.W., A priori veto power of the president of Poland, Oper. Res. Dec., 2009, 19 (4), 61-75.
[32] MERCIK J., ŁOBOS K., Index of implicit power as a measure of reciprocal ownership, [In:] N.T. Nguyen, R. Kowalczyk, J. Mercik (Eds.), Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence 23, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 9760, Springer, Heidelberg 2016, 128-140, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-52886-0_8. · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-52886-0_8
[33] MERCIK J., STACH I., On measurement of control in corporate structures, [In:] N.T. Nguyen, R. Ko-walczyk, J. Mercik, A. Motylska-Kuźma (Eds.), Transactions on Computational Collective Intelli-gence 31, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 11290, Springer, Berlin 2018, 64-79, DOI: 10.1007/978 -3-662-58464-4_7. · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-58464-4_7
[34] MYERSON R., Graphs and cooperation in games, Math. Oper. Res., 1977, 2 (3), 225-229. · Zbl 0402.90106
[35] NEVISON H., Structural power and satisfaction in simple games, [In:] S.J. Brams, A. Schotter, G. Schwödiauer (Eds.), Applied Game Theory, Physica, Heidelberg 1979, 39-57, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-41501-6_3. · Zbl 0421.90007 · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-41501-6_3
[36] PENROSE L.S., The elementary statistics of majority voting, J. Royal Stat. Soc., 1946, 109 (1), 53-57, DOI: 10.2307/2981392. · doi:10.2307/2981392
[37] PETERS H., TIMMER J., VAN DEN BRINK R., Power on digraphs, Oper. Res. Dec., 2016, 26 (2), 107-125, DOI: 10.5277/ord160207. · Zbl 1398.91113 · doi:10.5277/ord160207
[38] SHAPLEY L.S., SHUBIK M., A method for evaluating the distributions of power in a committee system, Am. Pol. Sci. Rev., 1954, 48 (3), 787-792, DOI: 10.2307/1951053. · doi:10.2307/1951053
[39] STACH I., Proper simple game, [In:] K. Dowding (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Power, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles 2011, 537-539.
[40] STACH I., 2011 Shapley-Shubik index, [In:] K. Dowding (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Power, SAGE Publi-cations, Los Angeles 2011, 603-606.
[41] STACH I., Power measures and public goods, [In:] N.T. Nguyen, R. Kowalczyk, J. Mercik (Eds.), Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence 23, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 9760, Springer, Heidelberg 2016, 99-110, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-52886-0_6. · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-52886-0_6
[42] STACH I., Indirect control of corporations: analysis and simulations, Dec. Making Manuf. Services, 2017, 11 (1-2), 31-51, DOI: 10.7494/dmms.2017.11.1-2.31. · Zbl 1474.91240 · doi:10.7494/dmms.2017.11.1-2.31
[43] STRAFFIN P.D., Power indices in politics, [In:] S.J. Brams, W.F. Lucas, P.D. Straffin (Eds.), Political and related models. Modules in applied mathematics, Springer, New York 1983, DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4612-5430-0_11. · Zbl 0582.90107 · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-5430-0_11
[44] TURNOVEC F., Privatization, ownership structure and transparency: How to measure the true involve-ment of the state, Eur. J. Pol. Econ., 1999, 15, 605-618.
[45] VAN DEN BRINK R., The Apex power measure for directed networks, Soc. Choice Welf., 2002, 19 (4), 845-867, DOI: 10.1007/s003550200162. · Zbl 1072.91517 · doi:10.1007/s003550200162
[46] VAN DEN BRINK R., BORM P., Digraph competitions and cooperative games, Theory Dec., 2002, 53, 327-342. · Zbl 1112.91007
[47] VAN DEN BRINK R., GILLES R., Measuring domination in directed networks, Soc. Net., 2000, 22, 141-157, DOI: 10.1016/S0378-8733 (00)00019-8. · doi:10.1016/S0378-8733(00
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.