2018
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3140704
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Delegation and Team Selection in Organizations: An Experimental Study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A main question in the economics of organization literature is whether organizations are more efficient when they are centrally managed or when decentralization takes place and the various units within an organization function independently. This topic has been the subject of several recent experimental studies [see Evdokimov and Garfagnini 2019;Hamman and Martínez-Carrasco 2018;Brandts and Cooper 2018;Cooper et al (1989)] with the evidence being inconclusive and heavily dependent on the context. In our 'Leader' treatment, one subject was chosen (randomly by the software) to be the leader, and he or she could send messages to all the other members of the group, and they could send messages to him or her; but no other messages were allowed.…”
Section: Hypothesismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A main question in the economics of organization literature is whether organizations are more efficient when they are centrally managed or when decentralization takes place and the various units within an organization function independently. This topic has been the subject of several recent experimental studies [see Evdokimov and Garfagnini 2019;Hamman and Martínez-Carrasco 2018;Brandts and Cooper 2018;Cooper et al (1989)] with the evidence being inconclusive and heavily dependent on the context. In our 'Leader' treatment, one subject was chosen (randomly by the software) to be the leader, and he or she could send messages to all the other members of the group, and they could send messages to him or her; but no other messages were allowed.…”
Section: Hypothesismentioning
confidence: 99%