IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecpoli/v38y2023i113p161-188..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Employees’ reaction to gender pay transparency: an online experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Marianna Baggio
  • Ginevra Marandola

Abstract

The primary aim of pay transparency measures is to make pay systems less opaque and to reduce the gender pay gap. To investigate the behavioural implications of pay transparency measures, we ran an incentivized online experiment focused on the effects on employees’ performance, provision of extra effort and actions to correct pay disparities. We found that overall pay transparency does not disrupt employees’ performance. However, by revealing relative wages, it does interfere with the provision of effort and extra effort of employees with a below-average wage. Moreover, we found that pay transparency increased potentially justified requests to correct pay disparities while decreasing unjustified requests. Our evidence also shows that employee’s effort and action against unfair pay are more sensitive to lower relative wage with respect to own gender, rather than the other gender. We discuss potential policy implications of these findings and argue that more research should be carried out to better understand the efficiency of transparency measures, with a particular focus on gender reference groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Marianna Baggio & Ginevra Marandola, 2023. "Employees’ reaction to gender pay transparency: an online experiment," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 38(113), pages 161-188.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecpoli:v:38:y:2023:i:113:p:161-188.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/epolic/eiac066
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Filippin, Antonio & Crosetto, Paolo, 2014. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," IZA Discussion Papers 8184, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Azmat, Ghazala & Petrongolo, Barbara, 2014. "Gender and the labor market: What have we learned from field and lab experiments?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 32-40.
    3. Gagnon, Nickolas & Bosmans, Kristof & Riedl, Arno, 2020. "The Effect of Unfair Chances and Gender Discrimination on Labor Supply," Research Memorandum 005, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    4. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1091-1119, April.
    5. Azmat, Ghazala & Petrongolo, Barbara, 2014. "Gender and the labor market: What have we learned from field and lab experiments?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 32-40.
    6. Antonio Filippin & Paolo Crosetto, 2016. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3138-3160, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5msrbb0rie9sjq3c4ejgb2v91o is not listed on IDEAS
    2. José De Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2023. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3358-3399, June.
    3. Andreoni, James & Di Girolamo, Amalia & List, John A. & Mackevicius, Claire & Samek, Anya, 2020. "Risk preferences of children and adolescents in relation to gender, cognitive skills, soft skills, and executive functions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 729-742.
    4. Igor Asanov & Maria Mavlikeeva, 2023. "Can group identity explain the gender gap in the recruitment process?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 95-113, January.
    5. Eva Ranehill & Roberto A. Weber, 2022. "Gender preference gaps and voting for redistribution," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 845-875, June.
    6. Drupp, Moritz A. & Khadjavi, Menusch & Riekhof, Marie-Catherine & Voss, Rudi, 2020. "Professional identity and the gender gap in risk-taking. Evidence from field experiments with scientists," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 418-432.
    7. Edin, Per-Anders & Selin, Håkan, 2022. "Financial Risk-Taking and the Gender Wage Gap," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5msrbb0rie9sjq3c4ejgb2v91o is not listed on IDEAS
    9. José de Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2021. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Post-Print hal-03389151, HAL.
    10. Estefanía Galván, 2022. "Gender Identity and Quality of Employment," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(354), pages 409-436, April.
    11. Claudia Olivetti & Barbara Petrongolo, 2016. "The Evolution of Gender Gaps in Industrialized Countries," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 405-434, October.
    12. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Eva Matthaei, 2022. "Gender Discriminatory Taxes, Fairness Perception, and Labor Supply," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 156-207.
    13. Borghorst, Malte & Mulalic, Ismir & van Ommeren, Jos, 2021. "Commuting, Children and the Gender Wage Gap," Working Papers 15-2021, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    14. Sarah Fleche & Anthony Lepinteur & Nattavudh Powdthavee, 2018. "Gender Norms and Relative Working Hours: Why Do Women Suffer More Than Men from Working Longer Hours Than Their Partners?," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 163-168, May.
    15. Lalive, Rafael & Card, David & Colella, Fabrizio, 2021. "Gender Preferences in Job Vacancies and Workplace Gender Diversity," CEPR Discussion Papers 16619, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Mario Lackner, 2021. "Gender differences in competitiveness," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 236-236, November.
    17. Anne‐Sophie Bruno & Nathalie Greenan & Jeremy Tanguy, 2021. "Does the Gender Mix Influence Collective Bargaining on Gender Equality? Evidence from France," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 479-520, October.
    18. Haaland, Venke Furre & Rege, Mari & Telle, Kjetil & Votruba, Mark, 2018. "The intergenerational transfer of the employment gender gap," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 132-146.
    19. Kiessling, Lukas & Pinger, Pia & Seegers, Philipp & Bergerhoff, Jan, 2024. "Gender differences in wage expectations and negotiation," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    20. Heather Joshi & Alexander Bryson & David Wilkinson & Kelly Ward, 2021. "The gender gap in wages over the life course: Evidence from a British cohort born in 1958," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 397-415, January.
    21. Sarah Louise Jewell & Giovanni Razzu & Carl Singleton, 2020. "Who Works for Whom and the UK Gender Pay Gap," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 58(1), pages 50-81, March.
    22. Bachmann, Ronald & Stepanyan, Gayane, 2020. "It's a Woman's World? Occupational Structure and the Rise of Female Employment in Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224626, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ecpoli:v:38:y:2023:i:113:p:161-188.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cebruuk.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.