IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/6107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incentives and Managerial Experience in Multi-Task Teams: Evidence from Within a Firm

Author

Listed:
  • Griffith, Rachel
  • Neely, Andrew

Abstract

This paper exploits a quasi-experimental setting to estimate the impact that a multi-dimensional group incentive scheme had on branch performance in a large distribution firm. The scheme, which is based on the Balanced Scorecard, was implemented in all branches in one division, but not in another. Branches from the second division are used as a control group. Our results suggest that the balanced scorecard had some impact, but that it varied with branch characteristics, and in particular, branches with more experienced managers were better able to respond to the new incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Griffith, Rachel & Neely, Andrew, 2007. "Incentives and Managerial Experience in Multi-Task Teams: Evidence from Within a Firm," CEPR Discussion Papers 6107, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:6107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP6107
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    2. Bengt Holmstrom, 1982. "Moral Hazard in Teams," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 324-340, Autumn.
    3. Norreklit, Hanne, 2003. "The Balanced Scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the Balanced Scorecard," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 591-619, August.
    4. Knez, Marc & Simester, Duncan, 2001. "Firm-Wide Incentives and Mutual Monitoring at Continental Airlines," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(4), pages 743-772, October.
    5. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
    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. Susan Helper & Morris M. Kleiner & Yingchun Wang, 2010. "Analyzing Compensation Methods in Manufacturing: Piece Rates, Time Rates, or Gain-Sharing?," NBER Working Papers 16540, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Shaw, Kathryn, 2009. "Insider econometrics: A roadmap with stops along the way," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 607-617, December.

    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. Carpenter, Jeffrey P. & Bowles, Samuel & Gintis, Herbert, 2006. "Mutual Monitoring in Teams: Theory and Experimental Evidence on the Importance of Reciprocity," IZA Discussion Papers 2106, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Mathieu Lefebvre & Lucie Martin-Bonnel de Longchamp, 2022. "Knowledge acquisition or incentive to foster coordination? A real-effort weak-link experiment with craftsmen," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(S1), pages 93-107, July.
    3. Adams, Christopher P., 2006. "Optimal team incentives with CES production," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 143-148, July.
    4. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2020. "Repeated Interaction in Teams: Tenure and Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1496-1507, March.
    5. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2015. "Desert and inequity aversion in teams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 42-54.
    6. MARTIN Ludivine, 2007. "The impact of technological changes on incentives and motivations to work hard," IRISS Working Paper Series 2007-15, IRISS at CEPS/INSTEAD.
    7. Hyun Seok (Huck) Lee & Saravanan Kesavan & Camelia Kuhnen, 2022. "When do group incentives for retail store managers work?," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(8), pages 3077-3095, August.
    8. Debashish Bhattacherjee, 2005. "The Effects of Group Incentives in an Indian Firm: Evidence from Payroll Data," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 19(1), pages 147-173, March.
    9. Michael Waldman, 2012. "Theory and Evidence in Internal LaborMarkets [The Handbook of Organizational Economics]," Introductory Chapters,, Princeton University Press.
    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. Misty L. Loughry & Henry L. Tosi, 2008. "Performance Implications of Peer Monitoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(6), pages 876-890, December.
    12. Johannes Abeler & Steffen Altmann & Sebastian Kube & Matthias Wibral, 2010. "Gift Exchange and Workers' Fairness Concerns: When Equality is Unfair," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(6), pages 1299-1324, December.
    13. Abeler, Johannes & Altmann, Steffen & Kube, Sebastian & Wibral, Matthias, 2006. "Reciprocity and Payment Schemes: When Equality Is Unfair," Ratio Working Papers 109, The Ratio Institute.
    14. Ran Abramitzky, 2011. "Lessons from the Kibbutz on the Equality-Incentives Trade-Off," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(1), pages 185-208, Winter.
    15. Frederiksen, Anders & Hansen, Daniel Baltzer Schjødt & Flaherty Manchester, Colleen, 2022. "Does Group-Based Incentive Pay Lead To Higher Productivity? Evidence from a Complex and Interdependent Industrial Production Process," IZA Discussion Papers 14986, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Tat Y. Chan & Jia Li & Lamar Pierce, 2014. "Compensation and Peer Effects in Competing Sales Teams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 1965-1984, August.
    17. Jeffrey Carpenter & Andrea Robbett & Prottoy A. Akbar, 2018. "Profit Sharing and Peer Reporting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4261-4276, September.
    18. Gaudeul, Alexia, 2009. "A (micro) course in microeconomic theory for MSc students," MPRA Paper 15388, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Kornelius Kraft & Julia Lang, 2016. "Just a Question of Selection? The Causal Effect of Profit Sharing on a Firm's Performance," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 444-467, July.
    20. repec:bla:annpce:v:89:y:2018:i:1:p:157-174 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Barton H. Hamilton & Jack A. Nickerson & Hideo Owan, 2003. "Team Incentives and Worker Heterogeneity: An Empirical Analysis of the Impact of Teams on Productivity and Participation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(3), pages 465-497, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Balanced scorecard; Incentive design; Managerial experience;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpr:ceprdp:6107. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.