Behavioural insight and the labour market: evidence from a pilot study and a large stepped-wedge controlled trial

Abstract

In this article, we describe two experiments measuring the impact of a collection of interventions informed by behavioural sciences to reduce unemployment. In a small-scale pilot study (n = 2,383) run in partnership with a Jobcentre in the UK, we found that small changes to the way jobseekers interacted with employment advisers showed promising effects. Based on these findings, we refined our intervention and tested it in a second, larger trial (n = 88,033) across 12 Jobcentres in the UK. We found that our intervention significantly increased off-flow from benefits. These experiments demonstrate that policies and programmes aimed at reducing unemployment can benefit greatly from a deeper understanding of the behaviours of jobseekers and employment advisers. Further, we suggest that this approach could have positive implications for other areas of public policy.

Improving Job Search Skills: A Field Experiment on Online Employment Assistance

“…Crépon et al (2005) and Hägglund (2007) provide evidence consistent with this suggestion evaluating a set of ALMP in France and in Sweden. Sanders et al (2019) show that JSA can be improved through administrative simplification. 2…”

Keep It Up Switzerland! Four Empirical Studies on Dual Vocational Education and Training

“…According to Saniter et al (2019) students profit from visiting career guidance centres by making a smoother transition to the labour market. Moreover, Sanders et al (2019) find that obtaining help from career guidance centres is advantageous, as reflected in shorter unemployment spells. However, the drawback of one-to-one career counselling through guidance centres is that it is costly (McNally, 2016).…”

Hard won lessons learned in the evaluation field: Implications for behavioural insights practice

“…BI shares with (early) evaluation a post‐positivist epistemological stance, a focus on assessing the effectiveness of policy and program interventions, and a view that experimental/quasi‐experimental research methods are the “gold standard” in conducting empirical studies (Ball and Head 2020; Sanders et al 2019).…”