Browse by subject:
Paper #1027
The Transaction-Cost Ledger of Decision Accounting
The paper defends Decision Accounting (DA) against the Williamson transaction-cost objection by running a formal ledger. It shows that DA applies selectively (tiered governance), that per-decision benefits (reduced hidden-failure loss, conformism break, reconstruction saving, cost-of-capital effect) exceed costs, and that DA actually lowers the transaction cost of verifying decision quality. The paper formalizes the net benefit theorem and provides existence proofs from aviation, healthcare, and financial audit.
OPEN HTML DECK ↗Deck mode is an on-site reading view, not a PowerPoint download.
Theorem status: evidence-traced claim under the cited paper's assumptionsFalsification: show the same game preserving system welfare without changing the payoff structure
KEY FINDINGS
THEOREM
Theorem 1 (DA Net Benefit): For any decision d in the target class (Tier 1 or Tier 2), the net benefit of DA documentation is positive if and only if B_h(d) + B_c(d) + B_r(d) + B_k(d) > C_p(d), where B_h is reduction in hidden-failure loss, B_c is conformism break benefit, B_r is reconstruction saving, B_k is cost-of-capital benefit, and C_p is production cost.
PLAIN ENGLISH
Decision Accounting is beneficial for consequential decisions when the combined benefits—reduced catastrophic failures, better decision-making from accountability, savings from not having to reconstruct decisions later, and lower cost of capital—exceed the cost of creating and reviewing the documentation.
EVIDENCE & LIMITATIONS
- Theorem status: evidence-traced claim under the cited paper's assumptions
- Falsification: show the same game preserving system welfare without changing the payoff structure
REFERENCES / CITATION STATUS
References section
Detected
Bibliography entries
97
In-text citations
1
Unique citations
96
Footnote markers
77
Citation year span
1937-2025
Source hash
3a4c1341fcf5
This page reports reference counts measured directly from the manuscript. Full reference entries render only when a curated source chapter carries a public References, Bibliography, Source Notes, Supplemental Reference Archive, Footnotes, or Source-Grounding Ledger section. The site does not synthesize citation entries. Literature-claim verification status: not evaluated.
Loading curated reference section…
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Oliver Williamson's transaction-cost economics (TCE) asks whether any governance structure reduces or adds to transaction costs. The Williamson objection to Decision Accounting (DA) is that it imposes a new bureaucracy: every governed decision requires a seventeen-field record, audit cycle, and review process. The paper runs the ledger and shows the objection fails. First, DA is tiered: only high-consequence (Tier 1) and consequential (Tier 2) decisions carry the full record; routine decisions (Tier 3) carry little or no documentation. Overhead scales with the number of consequential decisions, which is a small fraction of total activity. Second, the per-decision benefits dwarf the costs. The reduction in expected hidden-failure loss (e.g., preventing catastrophic failures) alone can be hundreds of thousands of dollars per decision. The conformism break improves decision quality by incentivizing broader consideration of alternatives. The reconstruction saving eliminates the costly forensic reconstruction of past decisions. The cost-of-capital effect reduces a firm's capital costs by 10-50 basis points. Third, the decisive argument internal to TCE: DA economizes on the transaction cost of verifying decision quality after the fact. Under the status quo, verification requires expensive forensic reconstruction; under DA, the record is the verification. The net transaction cost is negative—DA reduces total transaction costs. The paper formalizes the ledger as a theorem with falsification conditions and provides existence proofs from commercial aviation, healthcare (surgical safety checklist), and financial audit—industries that already operate under reconstruction-capable governance without being crushed by overhead. The honest limits are stated: the benefit terms depend on empirical effects still being tested, and universal application would validate the objection. The defense is the tiering and the verification-cost offset, not a claim that documentation is free.
METHODOLOGY
The paper uses theoretical analysis within the transaction-cost economics framework, formalizing the ledger as a theorem with definitions and proof. It provides existence proofs from three industries (aviation, healthcare, financial audit) and estimates costs and benefits based on reasonable assumptions and cited literature.
SOURCE QUESTIONS
SSRN not yet postedDeck ↗
WHY THIS MATTERS
For the economist
A structural claim about when bilateral optimization degrades the shared system. Read the formal statement and its stated axioms.
For the regulator
The constraint is physical or biological, so disclosure alone will not internalize it. The policy lever is to bound exposure, not to price it away.
For the executive
This is where a privately efficient decision can degrade the system the business depends on. The governance question is which decision records would make that system cost visible before it is normalized.
For the teacher
An on-site HTML deck and the expanded curriculum cover the argument, the evidence, and the measurement. Use the deck as a self-contained class session, then route deeper through the 45-50h core course or 100+h full curriculum.
For the affected community
In plain terms: who gains from the current arrangement, who pays for it, and what rule change would alter that split. The summary states each without jargon.
© 2026 Erik Postnieks · Independent Researcher · Salt Lake City