IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v26y2015i2p311-333.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting for the Gap: A Firm Study Manipulating Organizational Accountability and Transparency in Pay Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Emilio J. Castilla

    (MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

Abstract

Great progress has been made in documenting how employer practices may shape workplace inequality. Less research attention, however, has been given to investigating which organizational strategies are effective at addressing gender and racial inequality in labor markets. Using a unique field study design, this article identifies and tests, for the first time, whether accountability and transparency in pay decisions—two popular organizational initiatives discussed among scholars and practitioners—may reduce the pay gap by employee gender, race, and foreign nationality. Through a longitudinal analysis of a large private company, I study the performance-based reward decisions concerning almost 9,000 employees before and after high-level management adopted a set of organizational procedures, introducing accountability and transparency into the company’s performance-reward system. Before such procedures were introduced, there was an observed gap in the distribution of performance-based rewards where women, ethnic minorities, and non-U.S.-born employees received lower monetary rewards compared with U.S.-born white men having the same performance evaluation scores and working in the same job and work unit with the same manager and the same human capital characteristics. Analyses of the company’s employee performance-reward data after the adoption of accountability and transparency procedures show a reduction in this pay gap. I conclude by discussing the implications of this study for future research about employer strategies targeting workplace inequality and diversity.

Suggested Citation

  • Emilio J. Castilla, 2015. "Accounting for the Gap: A Firm Study Manipulating Organizational Accountability and Transparency in Pay Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 311-333, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:26:y:2015:i:2:p:311-333
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2014.0950
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0950
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2014.0950?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Lederman & Norman V. Loayza & Rodrigo R. Soares, 2005. "Accountability And Corruption: Political Institutions Matter," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 1-35, March.
    2. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    3. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2007. "Incentives for Managers and Inequality among Workers: Evidence from a Firm-Level Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(2), pages 729-773.
    4. Marta M. Elvira & Mary E. Graham, 2002. "Not Just a Formality: Pay System Formalization and Sex-Related Earnings Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(6), pages 601-617, December.
    5. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1979. "Job Matching and the Theory of Turnover," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(5), pages 972-990, October.
    6. Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2008. "Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil's Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(2), pages 703-745.
    7. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    8. repec:bla:ecopol:v:17:y:2005:i::p:1-35 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Bellemare, Charles & Shearer, Bruce, 2009. "Gift giving and worker productivity: Evidence from a firm-level experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 233-244, September.
    10. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    11. repec:feb:artefa:0087 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Uwe Jirjahn & Gesine Stephan, 2004. "Gender, piece rates and wages: evidence from matched employer--employee data," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 28(5), pages 683-704, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter T. Calcagno & Meg M. Montgomery, 2021. "The gender wage gap: an analysis of US congressional staff members," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 183-201, July.
    2. John Forth & Nikolaos Theodoropoulos, 2023. "Employers and the gender wage gap," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 511-511, October.
    3. Gamage, Danula K. & Kavetsos, Georgios & Mallick, Sushanta & Sevilla, Almudena, 2020. "Pay Transparency Initiative and Gender Pay Gap: Evidence from Research-Intensive Universities in the UK," IZA Discussion Papers 13635, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Colleen Flaherty Manchester & Lisa M. Leslie & Patricia C. Dahm, 2019. "Bringing Home the Bacon: The Relationships among Breadwinner Role, Performance, and Pay," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 46-85, January.
    5. Jie Liang & Peng Shao, 2019. "Sequential Alliance Portfolios, Partner Reconfiguration and Firm Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Ruthanne Huising & Susan S. Silbey, 2021. "Accountability infrastructures: Pragmatic compliance inside organizations," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 40-62, November.
    7. Monika Hamori & Denis Monneuse & Zhaoyi Yan, 2024. "Gender promotion gaps across business units in a multiunit organization: Supply‐ and demand‐side drivers," Post-Print hal-04655071, HAL.
    8. Colleen Flaherty Manchester & Sophie Leroy & Patricia C. Dahm & Theresa M. Glomb, 2023. "Amplifying the gender gap in academia: “Caregiving” at work during the pandemic," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 288-316, July.
    9. Julian Kolev & Yuly Fuentes-Medel & Fiona Murray, 2019. "Is Blinded Review Enough? How Gendered Outcomes Arise Even Under Anonymous Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 25759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Bennedsen, Morten & Larsen, Birthe & Wei, Jiayi, 2022. "Wage Transparency and the Gender Pay Gap: A Survey," Working Papers 17-2022, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    11. Maria Rouziou, 2019. "The contingent value of pay inequalities in sales organizations: integrating literatures in economics, management, and psychology," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(3), pages 184-204, December.
    12. Tim Hermans & Martine Cools & Alexandra Van den Abbeele, 2021. "The role of information accuracy and justification in bonus allocations," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 197-223, June.
    13. Danula K. Gamage & Georgios Kavetsos & Sushanta Mallick & Almudena Sevilla, 2024. "Pay transparency intervention and the gender pay gap: Evidence from research‐intensive universities in the UK," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 62(2), pages 293-318, June.
    14. Emilio J. Castilla & Aruna Ranganathan, 2020. "The Production of Merit: How Managers Understand and Apply Merit in the Workplace," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 909-935, July.
    15. Eva Labro & James D. Omartian, 2023. "Managing Employee Retention Concerns: Evidence from U.S. Census Data," Working Papers 23-07, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    16. Arnold, Markus C. & Artz, Martin & Tafkov, Ivo D., 2024. "The effect of target transparency on managers’ target setting decisions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    17. Adina D. Sterling & Roberto M. Fernandez, 2018. "Once in the Door: Gender, Tryouts, and the Initial Salaries of Managers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(11), pages 5444-5460, November.
    18. Isabel Fernandez-Mateo & Sarah Kaplan, 2018. "Gender and Organization Science: Introduction to a Virtual Special Issue," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1229-1236, December.
    19. I Gusti Ayu Purnamawati & Saarce Elyse Hatane, 2024. "Collaborative Governance in Strengthening Dimensions of Competitive Advantage of Sustainable Ecotourism Villages," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 180-190, July.
    20. Bernstein Ruth Sessler & Salipante Paul, 2024. "Embedding Inclusive, Equitable Diversity Practices in Nonprofit Organizations: Developing Policy to Account for System Dynamics," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 97-120, April.
    21. Kanze, Dana & Conley, Mark A. & Higgins, E. Tory, 2021. "The motivation of mission statements: How regulatory mode influences workplace discrimination," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 84-103.
    22. Eliot L. Sherman & Raina Brands & Gillian Ku, 2023. "Dropping Anchor: A Field Experiment Assessing a Salary History Ban with Archival Replication," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2919-2932, May.
    23. Matthew Caulfield, 2021. "Pay Secrecy, Discrimination, and Autonomy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(2), pages 399-420, June.
    24. Kevin Boudreau & Nilam Kaushik, 2020. "The Gender Gap in Tech & Competitive Work Environments? Field Experimental Evidence from an Internet-of-Things Product Development Platform," NBER Working Papers 27154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2019. "How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(1), pages 33-39, January.
    2. Gosnell, Greer & Metcalfe, Robert & List, John A, 2016. "A new approach to an age-old problem: solving externalities by incenting workers directly," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84331, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2011. "Field Experiments with Firms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 63-82, Summer.
    4. J. S. Maloy, 2014. "Linkages of Electoral Accountability: Empirical Results and Methodological Lessons," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 13-27.
    5. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Aaron K. Chatterji & Michael Findley & Nathan M. Jensen & Stephan Meier & Daniel Nielson, 2016. "Field experiments in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 116-132, January.
    6. Faralla, Valeria & Borà, Guido & Innocenti, Alessandro & Novarese, Marco, 2020. "Promises in group decision making," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 1-11.
    7. Edward P. Lazear, 1995. "Personnel Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121883, April.
    8. Bouma, J.A. & Nguyen, Binh & van der Heijden, Eline & Dijk, J.J., 2018. "Analysing Group Contract Design Using a Lab and a Lab-in-the-Field Threshold Public Good Experiment," Discussion Paper 2018-049, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Vera Angelova & Tobias Regner, 2012. "Do voluntary payments to advisors improve the quality of financial advice? An experimental sender-receiver game," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-011, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    10. Baldwin, Kate & Bhavnani, Rikhil R., 2013. "Ancillary Experiments: Opportunities and Challenges," WIDER Working Paper Series 024, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Henk Folmer & Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2011. "Does Environmental Economics Produce Aeroplanes Without Engines? On the Need for an Environmental Social Science," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 337-361, March.
    12. Cameron, Lisa & Chaudhuri, Ananish & Erkal, Nisvan & Gangadharan, Lata, 2009. "Propensities to engage in and punish corrupt behavior: Experimental evidence from Australia, India, Indonesia and Singapore," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 843-851, August.
    13. Ferraz, Claudio & Finan, Frederico S., 2007. "Electoral Accountability and Corruption in Local Governments: Evidence from Audit Reports," IZA Discussion Papers 2843, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2013. "On the Generalizability of Experimental Results in Economics: With A Response To Camerer," Artefactual Field Experiments j0001, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. Christian Dustmann & Albrecht Glitz & Uta Schönberg & Herbert Brücker, 2016. "Referral-based Job Search Networks," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(2), pages 514-546.
    16. Eric Floyd & John A. List, 2016. "Using Field Experiments in Accounting and Finance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 437-475, May.
    17. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    18. Aysit Tansel & Ali T. Akarca, 2012. "Turkish Voter Response to Government Incompetence and Corruption Related to the 1999 Earthquakes," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 1204, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
    19. Juho Jokinen & Jaakko Pehkonen, 2017. "Promotions and Earnings – Gender or Merit? Evidence from Longitudinal Personnel Data," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 306-334, September.
    20. Sebastian Kube & Michel André Maréchal & Clemens Puppe, 2013. "Do Wage Cuts Damage Work Morale? Evidence From A Natural Field Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 853-870, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:26:y:2015:i:2:p:311-333. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.