Abstract:We examine how worker productivity differs when performance-based compensation is based on measures of quantity, creativity, or the product of both measures. In an experimental task in which participants design "rebus puzzles," we find that quantitybased compensation increases the number of puzzles produced, and that creativity-based compensation improves average creativity ratings, as evaluated by an independent panel of raters. However, a weighted compensation scheme that rewards the product of quantity and average creativity ratings results in weighted productivity scores that are significantly lower than those generated by participants with quantity incentives alone. Follow-up analysis indicates that relative to participants compensated solely for quantity, participants in the weighted condition produce approximately the same number of high-creativity puzzles, but produce significantly fewer puzzles of mediocre creativity. This finding is consistent with the premise that participants rewarded for creativity-weighted output simplify their objective by restricting their production to high-creativity ideas, but are unable to translate this focus into a greater volume of high-creativity output. Implications address a possible explanation for why firms are reluctant to incorporate creativity measures within multi-dimensional performance measurement systems, notwithstanding published suggestions to do so.
We present experimental evidence suggesting that critical audit matter (CAM) disclosures in the auditor's report involving areas of high measurement uncertainty forewarn users of misstatement risk. Specifically, in our first study with MBA students, financial analysts, and attorneys, we find that CAMs (i) lower premisstatement assessments of confidence in the financial statement area disclosed as a CAM, and (ii) lower assessments of auditor responsibility for a subsequently revealed misstatement in a CAM-related area. In our second study with student participants proxying as mock jurors, we find that the responsibility-mitigating effect of CAM disclosure is driven by CAM disclosures involving measurement uncertainty, as opposed to CAM disclosures involving categorical determinations. Combined, our findings help reconcile mixed evidence from prior research, supporting the view that the forewarning effect of CAM disclosures involving measurement uncertainty could mitigate perceived auditor responsibility for CAM-related material misstatements.
We find that the effectiveness of piece-rate compensation relative to fixed pay in a laboratory letter-search task hinges on the presence or absence of a nonbinding statement to participants that the experimenter values correct responses. In the absence of the value statement, participants with piece-rate rewards for correct responses generate more correct and incorrect responses than do their counterparts with fixed pay, correcting errors as they go along to maximize compensation. Essentially, piece-rate compensation acts as an output control, incentivizing participants to maximize correct responses through a "produce-and-improve" strategy. The value statement suppresses this strategy because participants appear to perceive it as an input constraint, prompting greater initial care at the expense of lower overall productivity. As a result, the value statement eliminates the gains in correct responses that piece-rate incentivized participants otherwise realize. Thus, in settings in which individuals can gain efficiency by working expeditiously and improving quality when necessary, our results suggest the possibility that organizations could be better off just letting incentive schemes operate, rather than emphasizing quality in ways that could overly constrain productivity.Les valeurs communiqu ees a titre de contrôles informels : promouvoir la qualit e au prix de l' erosion de la productivit e?
Questionnaire responses reported by Luft and Libby (1997) reveal that transfer price negotiators expect fairness-based price concessions that moderate the influence of an outside market price when the outside market price strongly favors one of the parties. We examine whether these expectations of fairness extend to the actual prices that result from real-cash negotiations. Findings indicate that expectations of fairness-based price concessions do not survive actual negotiations when participants negotiate over a computer network with no communication other than bids, asks, and acceptances. Conversely, both expectations and actual negotiated outcomes reflect fairness-based price concessions when participants negotiate in a face-to-face setting with unrestricted communication. Together, these results imply that the extent to which questionnaire-based judgments of social behavior generalize to actual behavior depends on the whether the competitive environment suppresses or reinforces the social presence necessary to sustain phenomena such as preferences for fairness.
Performance-based compensation contracts can affect productivity both by motivating effort and by attracting workers whose abilities align best with the offered contracts. Using an experiment in which participants design “rebus puzzles,” this study tests whether the incremental benefits of contract self-selection extend to a multi-dimensional performance environment in which participants choose between a contract that rewards both quantity and creativity versus a contract that rewards quantity only. Findings indicate that participants who choose a creativity-weighted pay scheme perceive themselves to have greater creative potential than those who choose a quantity-only scheme. This perceived creativity advantage manifests itself in the superior initial creativity ratings of such participants’ productive output. However, in the aggregate, participants paid only for quantity eventually surpass the creativity-weighted productivity scores of participants paid for creativity-weighted productivity, whether compensation contracts are self-selected or randomly assigned. Thus, the implications of contract selection on creativity-weighted productivity hinge on the importance of the initial advantage enjoyed by participants who self-select a creativity-weighted contract.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.