IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v37y2020i3p1512-1535.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects of Incentive Scheme and Task Difficulty on Employees' Altruistic Behavior Outside the Firm†

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew H. Newman
  • Ivo D. Tafkov
  • Flora Hailan Zhou

Abstract

Employer‐sponsored opportunities for altruism outside the workplace can improve employee engagement and passion within the firm, enhance the firm's corporate visibility, and improve its recruitment. There is limited understanding of whether and how a firm's management control system on employees' daily tasks can influence employee willingness to engage in altruism outside the workplace. In this study, we investigate via an experiment how the incentive scheme (tournament vs. piece rate) on employees' daily tasks interacts with the difficulty level of these tasks (low vs. high) to affect employees' altruistic behavior outside the firm. Our results indicate that, compared to a piece‐rate scheme, a tournament scheme leads to a greater decrease in non‐winning participants' altruistic behavior outside the firm when the original, incentivized task is more difficult compared to when it is less difficult. Consistent with our theory, participants' feelings of excessive entitlement partially mediate the interaction effect of incentive scheme and task difficulty on participants' altruistic behavior outside the firm. This study informs firms about how the design of its incentive scheme on employees' daily task inside the firm and the nature of that task can influence employee willingness to act altruistically outside the firm. Influence du régime d'incitation et de la difficulté des tâches sur le comportement altruiste des employés à l'extérieur de l'entreprise Les occasions d'altruisme hors du lieu de travail parrainées par l'employeur peuvent améliorer l'engagement et la passion des employés au sein de l'entreprise, accroître la visibilité de cette dernière et favoriser le recrutement. Nous ne savons pas encore exactement si, et de quelle façon, le système de contrôle de gestion touchant les activités quotidiennes des employés d'une entreprise peut influencer la disposition des employés à faire preuve d'altruisme à l'extérieur de leur lieu de travail. Dans le cadre de cette étude, nous faisons une expérience pour vérifier de quelle façon le régime d'incitation (fondé sur la compétition ou à la pièce) relatif aux tâches quotidiennes des employés interagit avec le niveau de difficulté de ces tâches (faible ou élevé) pour influencer le comportement altruiste des employés à l'extérieur de l'entreprise. Nos résultats indiquent que, par rapport à un régime à la pièce, un régime fondé sur la compétition entraîne une réduction plus importante du comportement altruiste hors de l'entreprise chez les participants n'ayant pas gagné lorsque la tâche initiale faisant l'objet d'un incitatif est plus difficile que lorsqu'elle est plus facile. Conformément à notre théorie, le sentiment de légitimité excessive qu’éprouvent les participants atténue partiellement l'effet d'interaction du régime d'incitation et de la difficulté de la tâche sur leur comportement altruiste à l'extérieur de l'entreprise. La présente étude indique de quelle façon la conception du régime d'incitation relatif aux tâches quotidiennes des employés à l'intérieur de l'entreprise et la nature de ces tâches peuvent influencer la disposition des employés à agir de façon altruiste à l'extérieur de l'entreprise.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew H. Newman & Ivo D. Tafkov & Flora Hailan Zhou, 2020. "The Effects of Incentive Scheme and Task Difficulty on Employees' Altruistic Behavior Outside the Firm†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 1512-1535, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:37:y:2020:i:3:p:1512-1535
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12567
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12567?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. Ernst Fehr & Georg Kirchsteiger & Arno Riedl, 1993. "Does Fairness Prevent Market Clearing? An Experimental Investigation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(2), pages 437-459.
    2. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    3. Isabella Grabner & Frank Moers, 2013. "Managers' Choices of Performance Measures in Promotion Decisions: An Analysis of Alternative Job Assignments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 1187-1220, December.
    4. Cason, Timothy N. & Masters, William A. & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2010. "Entry into winner-take-all and proportional-prize contests: An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(9-10), pages 604-611, October.
    5. Jongwoon (Willie) Choi & Gary W. Hecht & William B. Tayler, 2013. "Strategy Selection, Surrogation, and Strategic Performance Measurement Systems," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 105-133, March.
    6. Bonner, Sarah E. & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2002. "The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: theories, evidence, and a framework for research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(4-5), pages 303-345.
    7. John, Leslie K. & Loewenstein, George & Rick, Scott I., 2014. "Cheating more for less: Upward social comparisons motivate the poorly compensated to cheat," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 101-109.
    8. Wendy J. Bailey & Gary Hecht & Kristy L. Towry, 2011. "Dividing the Pie: The Influence of Managerial Discretion Extent on Bonus Pool Allocation," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1562-1584, December.
    9. Christine Harbring & Bernd Irlenbusch, 2011. "Sabotage in Tournaments: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 611-627, April.
    10. Kelly, Khim & Presslee, Adam, 2017. "Tournament group identity and performance: The moderating effect of winner proportion," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 21-34.
    11. Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2003. "Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 287-318.
    12. Brownell, Peter & Dunk, Alan S., 1991. "Task uncertainty and its interaction with budgetary participation and budget emphasis: Some methodological issues and empirical investigation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 693-703.
    13. Christ, Margaret H. & Emett, Scott A. & Tayler, William B. & Wood, David A., 2016. "Compensation or feedback: Motivating performance in multidimensional tasks," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 27-40.
    14. Harbring, Christine & Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2003. "An experimental study on tournament design," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 443-464, August.
    15. Bonner, Sarah E., 1994. "A model of the effects of audit task complexity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 213-234, April.
    16. Harbring, Christine & Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2008. "How many winners are good to have?: On tournaments with sabotage," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 682-702, March.
    17. Linda Babcock & Xianghong Wang & George Loewenstein, 1996. "Choosing the Wrong Pond: Social Comparisons in Negotiations That Reflect a Self-Serving Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 111(1), pages 1-19.
    18. Lau, Chong M. & Low, Liang C. & Eggleton, Ian R. C., 1995. "The impact of reliance on accounting performance measures on job-related tension and managerial performance: Additional evidence," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 359-381, July.
    19. Wood, Robert E., 1986. "Task complexity: Definition of the construct," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 60-82, February.
    20. Christine Harbring, 2006. "The effect of communication in incentive systems-an experimental study," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 333-353.
    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. Newman, Andrew H. & Tafkov, Ivo D. & Waddoups, Nathan J. & Xiong, Xiaomei Grazia, 2024. "The effect of reward frequency on performance under cash rewards and tangible rewards," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    2. Black, Paul W., 2023. "The effect of peer-to-peer recognition systems on helping behavior: The influence of rewards and group affiliation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).

    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. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    2. Lisa-Marie Wibbeke & Maik Lachmann, 2020. "Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 275-328, September.
    3. Yan Chen & Peter Cramton & John A. List & Axel Ockenfels, 2021. "Market Design, Human Behavior, and Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5317-5348, September.
    4. Dutcher, E. Glenn & Balafoutas, Loukas & Lindner, Florian & Ryvkin, Dmitry & Sutter, Matthias, 2015. "Strive to be first or avoid being last: An experiment on relative performance incentives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 39-56.
    5. Christine Harbring & Bernd Irlenbusch, 2011. "Sabotage in Tournaments: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 611-627, April.
    6. Harbring, Christine & Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2009. "Sabotage in Tournaments: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 4205, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Loukas Balafoutas & E. Glenn Dutcher & Florian Lindner & Dmitry Ryvkin, 2017. "The Optimal Allocation Of Prizes In Tournaments Of Heterogeneous Agents," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 461-478, January.
    8. Glenn Dutcher & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Dmitry Ryvkin, 2016. "Don't hate the player, hate the game: Uncovering the foundations of cheating in contests," Working Papers 2016-29, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    9. De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2018. "The adverse consequences of tournaments: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-18.
    10. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    11. Bernd Irlenbusch, 2006. "Experimental perspectives on incentives in organisations," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, February.
    12. Etchart-Vincent, Nathalie, 2007. "Expérimentation de laboratoire et économie : contre quelques idées reçues et faux problèmes," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 83(1), pages 91-116, mars.
    13. Bonner, Sarah E. & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2002. "The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: theories, evidence, and a framework for research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(4-5), pages 303-345.
    14. Fallucchi, Francesco & Quercia, Simone, 2018. "Affirmative action and retaliation in experimental contests," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 23-40.
    15. Loberg, Linda & Nüesch, Stephan & Foege, Johann Nils, 2021. "Forced distribution rating systems and team collaboration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 18-35.
    16. Lindner, Florian & Dutcher, E. Glenn & Balafoutas, Loukas & Ryvkin, Dmitry & Sutter, Matthias, 2013. "Strive to be first and avoid being last: An experiment on relative performance incentives," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79885, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    17. Steven Jacob Bosworth & Simon Bartke, 2019. "Cross-task spillovers in workplace teams: Motivation vs. learning," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2019-15, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    18. Bradler, Christiane & Neckermann, Susanne & Warnke, Arne Jonas, 2016. "Incentivizing creativity: A large-scale experiment with tournaments and gifts," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Werner Güth & René Levínský & Kerstin Pull & Ori Weisel, 2016. "Tournaments and piece rates revisited: a theoretical and experimental study of output-dependent prize tournaments," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 20(1), pages 69-88, March.
    20. van Rinsum, M., 2019. "Utilizing Incentives and Accountability: In Control in Control?," ERIM Inaugural Address Series Research in Management EIA 2019-078-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam..

    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:wly:coacre:v:37:y:2020:i:3:p:1512-1535. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.