Incentive Contract Design and Employee-Initiated Innovation: Evidence from the Field*

This study examines how the design of incentive contracts for tasks defined as workers' official responsibilities (i.e., standard tasks) influences workers' propensity to engage in employee-initiated innovation (EII). EII corresponds to innovation activities that are not formally assigned to workers but are nonetheless encouraged and considered to be important for the company's success. Like other extra-role behaviors, EII is difficult to incentivize directly. Therefore, it is important to understand whether and how explicit incentive contracts designed for the workers' standard tasks may indirectly influence their EII activity. We use field data from a manufacturing company that uses a dedicated information system to track workers' EII idea submissions. We find theory-consistent evidence that, compared to workers receiving fixed pay, employees rewarded for their standard tasks with variable compensation contracts exhibit a lower propensity to engage in EII. This result is concentrated among ideas benefiting other constituents and activities beyond the proponents' standard task (i.e., broad-scope ideas). In contrast, we find no difference attributable to standard task incentive design in the proposal of innovation ideas narrowly focused on the proponent's standard task (i.e., narrow-scope ideas). Our findings suggest that variable pay narrows employees' conceptual focus around the standard task and hinders employee engagement in broad-scope innovation activities compared to fixed compensation contracts. We contribute to the literature on incentives for innovation by showing that standard task compensation contracts have spillover effects on EII behavior. We also contribute to the nascent literature on EII by showing that innovation types, defined based on their relation with the proponent's standard task, matter. Our results are relevant for practitioners in that managers relying on variable pay contracts to incentivize standard task performance should expect lower employee engagement in broad-scope EII.     

The Informativeness of Relative Performance Information and Its Effect on Effort Allocation in a Multitask Environment

Prior research documents that providing relative performance information (RPI) motivates employees to increase effort; however, a potential downside of RPI is that it also motivates employees to distort their effort allocations between tasks such that it can be detrimental to overall firm performance. This study investigates via an experiment how the informativeness of RPI affects employees' effort allocations and performance in a multitask environment. We investigate the informativeness of two RPI design choices that are observed in practice: detail level and temporal aggregation. Regarding detail level, firms may provide each employee's performance ranking on tasks, which is less informative than providing the actual performance score of each employee. Regarding temporal aggregation, firms may provide RPI that is reset each period, which is less informative than RPI that is based on cumulative performance. We find RPI detail level and temporal aggregation interact to influence effort distortion. Specifically, we find that, compared to reset RPI, cumulative RPI leads to greater distortion of effort away from firm‐preferred allocations and that this effect is magnified when RPI provides actual performance scores rather than performance rankings. Finally, high levels of effort distortion hurt overall performance, thereby demonstrating the potentially detrimental effect of effort distortion on performance. Results of our study enhance our understanding of how firms can use their control over the design of RPI to enhance its usefulness in directing employees' effort in multitask environments by highlighting the role that informativeness of information can have on employee behavior.     

Sabotaging Another: Priming Competition Increases Cheating Behavior in Tournaments

Trophy. Goal. Dominated . Does priming individuals with competitive concepts such as these influence the temptation to cheat? We utilize a standard laboratory cheating task in a tournament setting and test whether nonconscious priming impacts the nature of cheating behavior. The results demonstrate an asymmetry in a winner‐take‐all setting: a competitive prime does not increase cheating to improve one's own outcome, but does significantly increase the willingness of an individual to sabotage a competitor.     

The Effects of Norms on Investor Reactions to Derivative Use

Prior research indicates that a firm's use of derivatives to manage business risks is viewed favorably by investors. However, these studies do not consider a potentially key factor in this setting—namely, the typical behavior (or norms) regarding derivatives by other firms in the industry or the firm itself. In this paper, we report the results of multiple experiments that test whether norms are influential in affecting investors’ evaluations of firms’ derivatives choices. Our results show that the generally favorable reactions to derivative use actually reverse and become unfavorable when firms’ derivative decisions are inconsistent with industry or firm norms. Somewhat surprisingly, though, we find that industry and firm norms are not viewed similarly by investors. These results expand our understanding of how investors respond to firm's derivative use decisions and demonstrate the role of norms as factors that influence investors’ judgments in financial reporting settings. Our results have implications for firm managers making decisions about derivative use.     

Multiplant Firms and Innovation Adoption and Diffusion

A new theoretical explanation is provided for the empirical observation that large firms usually adopt sooner, although there are notable exceptions. The analysis focuses on the adoption of an innovation of uncertain profitability by a large firm with two plants and a small firm with one. Marginal production costs are increasing in each plant, and economies of multiplant operation are possible. These have conflicting effects on the incentive to adopt. The large firm benefits more from adopting a success. However, if an adopter must shut down a plant to learn about the innovation, the loss of multiplant economies reduces the large firm's incentive to adopt. Absent multiplant economies, the large firm is more likely to lead a diffusion because its greater return from a success dominates. However, the small firm is more likely to lead a diffusion if there are multiplant economies and the large firm's learning cost disadvantage dominates.     

Incentivising the Social Discounting Task: A Laboratory Experiment

Incentivising the social discounting task impacts the measurement of altruism in a student population. Incentivised subjects are more altruistic at close social distances, especially subjects who are less altruistic, thus providing evidence of reciprocal altruism. There is also some evidence of hypothetical bias among more altruistically inclined subjects. Making payments real also influences the subject's choice of recipient. Paid subjects select more geographically distant, but psychologically closer subjects, because of prospects for increased anonymity and enforced reciprocity, respectively. Further research is required to verify the robustness of these results, in the laboratory and especially in the field.     

People Playing Games: The Human Face of Experimental Economics

Experiments can be used not only to test theory but also to measure preferences and assess heterogeneity of behavior. I discuss the design of experimental measures of altruism and trust, as well as their uses in assessing how behavior varies across individuals, and across partners that a given individual might encounter. Experiments show that women are more altruistic than men. The appearance of a partner substantially impacts trust and trustworthiness, in part through the association of attractiveness and skin tone with expectations about a partner's behavior.     

Are International Remittances Altruism or Insurance? Evidence from Guyana Using Multiple-Migrant Households

While international remittances provide significant disposable income for many households in less-developed countries, there is no consensus on migrants’ remittance motivation. Two principal competing explanations for remittances are altruism and risk sharing. This paper employs previously unanalyzed data to bring new evidence to the debate. We develop a simple theoretical model that yields distinct testable predictions for each motivation. Among the model’s testable predictions is differential remittance behavior by migrants from households with multiple versus single migrants under altruism and risk sharing. Our estimation finds significant differences in remittance behavior of multiple and single migrants and these differences support the altruistic incentive to remit.     

Designing Internal Controls: The Interaction between Efficiency Wages and Monitoring*

Abstract. I examine how an internal auditor, called the firm, designs a control system for a strategic employee who conditions his thefts on the amount and types of controls. Society sets minimum testing amounts and fines for detected theft, whereas the firm determines the employee's wages and the amount of monitoring above the minimum. The results fall into three separate cases. When society's minimum testing standards and fines are sufficiently high, the employee never steals in any period. In this case, the firm performs the minimum amount of testing and pays the lowest feasible wage. In the remaining two cases, the testing standard and fines are too low to prevent theft by themselves. In these two cases the firm's control system determines whether there will be theft in the first period. I show that if the firm chooses to prevent all first-period theft, then it uses only one type of control. She offers a wage premium and monitors the minimum amount. The wage premium substitutes for a tine large enough to prevent all theft. If the firm designs controls that do not prevent all theft, then the firm also uses only one control. In contrast to the no-theft case, the firm pays the lowest feasible wage and monitors above the minimum. This choice reflects the increasing returns to scale of monitoring in preventing theft.     

Managers' Discretionary Adjustments: The Influence of Uncontrollable Events and Compensation Interdependence

Discretionary bonus adjustments allow managers to restore the alignment of employee effort and compensation when bonus amounts are based on noisy objective performance measures. The implications of discretionary adjustments for employees' future efforts and fairness perceptions present important trade‐offs for managers to consider. Adjustments may be used to motivate different types of effort in future periods, but may also create perceptions of unfairness among employees who are not affected by negative events. This study examines the joint influence of the likelihood of future negative uncontrollable events and compensation interdependence (i.e., the extent to which one employee's compensation influences others' compensation) on managers' willingness to make adjustments for the effect of a negative uncontrollable event on a single employee. In our experiment, we manipulate the likelihood of future uncontrollable events and whether bonuses are determined individually or are drawn from a shared bonus pool. Results show that managers are less willing to adjust when the likelihood of future events is high to avoid setting a precedent, thereby motivating employees to adapt to changing conditions. We also find that managers are less willing to adjust, regardless of event likelihood, when compensation interdependence is high, to avoid demotivating unaffected employees. Finally, we find that participants' general attitudes toward compensation significantly influence their adjustment decisions beyond the effects of our independent variables. Our results highlight the unique nature of discretionary adjustments, help explain findings from previous research, and demonstrate important considerations managers must make when using the flexibility provided to them in pay‐for‐performance contracts.     

Auditor Liability and Business Investment*

We model a firm's investment decision, an auditor's effort‐rendering behavior, audit fees, and prices of the firms under two auditor liability rules: strict liability and negligence liability. We show that an auditor's effort level is socially optimal under strict liability, while it is not generally so under negligence liability. Furthermore, both the firm owner's expected benefit and the audit fee are higher under strict liability than under negligence liability. We define the legal error under negligence liability as the difference between the assessed audit effort (that is, the estimate of audit effort made by the court) and the actual audit effort and prove that the greater the variance of the legal error, the more incentive an auditor has to exert effort under negligence liability compared with strict liability. Finally, the number of investments being undertaken could be higher under strict liability because more firm owners are willing to hire auditors to go public.     

The Market's Assessment of the Probability of Meeting or Beating the Consensus

We investigate to what extent the market uses information that is predictive of whether earnings will meet or beat the analyst consensus forecast of earnings (MBE henceforth): measures of a firm's incentives to engage in MBE behavior, measures of constraints on MBE, measures of past MBE practices by firm and industry, and other variables. Using the Mishkin test framework and Bonferroni‐adjusted p‐values, we document that of a total of 21 variables, the market inefficiently uses information in one difficulty measure and four other predictors, suggesting that strong empirically and theoretically grounded relationships concerning MBE behavior are more likely to be unraveled by the market. We further show that a portfolio based on the difference between the objective MBE probability and the market‐assessed MBE probability generates significant abnormal returns. The documented return anomaly is distinct from other known anomalies and cannot be fully explained by arbitrage risk or transaction costs.     

Turning Up the Volume: An Experimental Investigation of the Role of Mutual Monitoring in Tournaments

This study investigates experimentally how mutual monitoring affects effort when employees are compensated via rank‐order tournaments. Theory and anecdotal evidence suggest that mutual monitoring may either decrease effort by facilitating collusion or increase effort by stimulating competition. In our first experiment, we find that mutual monitoring increases effort, because participants do not attempt to collude but rather behave competitively. This result leads us to expand our theory and develop hypotheses to predict that the effect of mutual monitoring depends on whether employees have the inclination to collude or compete. Specifically, we predict that mutual monitoring decreases effort when employees are inclined to collude and increases effort when employees are inclined to compete; that is, mutual monitoring will not change the basic inclination created by the workplace setting, but will “turn up the volume” on the effect that such inclination has on effort. Consistent with our predictions, our second experiment finds that mutual monitoring leads to lower effort when participants have a collusive inclination and (eventually) higher effort when they have a competitive inclination. Overall, the results from these two experiments suggest that allowing employees to observe each other's productive effort in tournament incentive settings may have positive or negative consequences for the firm, depending on whether environmental factors predispose employees to collude or compete.     

Job Allocation Rules and Sorting Efficiency: Experimental Outcomes in a Peter Principle Environment

An important issue in personnel economics is the design of efficient job allocation rules. Firms often use promotions both to sort workers across jobs and to provide them with incentives. However, the Peter Principle states that employees' output tends to fall after a promotion. Lazear (2004) suggests that self‐selection may improve job allocation efficiency while preserving incentive effects. We reproduce this Peter Principle in the laboratory and compare the efficiency of a promotion standard with subjects self‐selecting their task. We find no evidence of effort distortion, as predicted by theory. Furthermore, we find that when the Peter Principle is not severe, promotion rules often dominate self‐selection efficiency of task assignment. Results are consistent with imperfect appraisal of transitory ability and a lack of strategic behavior.     

Does wage justice hamper creativity? Pay gap and firm innovation in China

Although the pay gap between executives and employees has received considerable attention, its economic consequences remain unclear due to the unavailability of data. In this study, we examine the effects of the pay gap on firm innovation by using data from Chinese listed firms. We show that: 1) the first-order effect of pay gap on firm innovation is significantly positive, supporting the tournament theory; 2) however, when pay gap is relatively high, the importance of comparison theories increases; 3) high management pay premiums provide incentives for management to devote to innovation activities, while pay premiums for ordinary employees impede firm innovation; and 4) both the employee's human capital and state ownership play significant roles in the negative effects of employee pay premiums on firm innovation. Overall, we provide critical insights and a serious challenge for regulators in China. The policy implications of this study could be of interest to regulators who intend to encourage firm innovation.     

Express Yourself: Why Managers' Disclosure Tone Varies Across Time and What Investors Learn from It

We argue that volatility in a manager's disclosure tone across time should be a function of two components: (i) the firm's innate operating risk and (ii) the extent to which the manager's disclosure transparently reflects that risk. Consistent with this argument, we find that both operating risk and disclosure transparency are important determinants of disclosure tone volatility. We then examine whether investors incorporate the incremental information provided by disclosure tone volatility into their assessments of firm risk. If disclosure tone volatility primarily provides investors with incremental information about a firm's operating risk, we should find a positive association between tone volatility and market-based assessments of risk. On the other hand, if disclosure tone volatility primarily provides investors with incremental information about a manager's disclosure transparency, we should find a negative association between tone volatility and market-based assessments of risk. Consistent with an operating risk explanation, we find a positive association between disclosure tone volatility and market-based assessments of firm risk after controlling for a comprehensive set of proxies for operating risk and transparency. We find little support for an information risk explanation, even when we examine multiple measures specifically designed to capture information risk. Taken together, our results suggest that although disclosure tone volatility is a function of both a firm's operating risk and a manager's disclosure transparency, investors appear to respond as if disclosure tone volatility only provides incremental information about a firm's operating risk.     

Monetary Policy and Corporate Investment： Evidence from Chinese Micro Data

This paper investigates how a firm's characteristics restrict the influence of monetary policy changes on its investment behavior. Focusing on China's listed companies for a sample period from the first quarter of 2002 to the first quarter of 2011, we find that quantity‐oriented and price‐based monetary policies have heterogeneous impacts on corporate investment behavior, but the influence of monetary policies is constrained by the liquidity, inventory, size and asset–liability ratio of a firm. Firms with higher liquidity, lower inventory level and lower asset–liability ratios are less sensitive to the impact from two kinds of monetary policies. The larger the size of the firm, the less it is subject to influence from quantity‐oriented monetary policy; it responds more to price‐based monetary policy. The policy implication is that the monetary authorities should pay attention to the importance of policy‐making based on the monetary demand of microeconomic entities.     

The Impact of Internal Auditor Compensation and Role on External Auditors' Planning Judgments and Decisions*

This paper reports the results of an experiment that investigates how external audit planning is affected when internal auditors have incentives and the opportunity to bias their evaluations. Specifically, we draw on attribution theory to examine how internal auditor eligibility for incentive compensation and participation in consulting (i.e., two factors that provide incentives to bias audit evaluations) affect external audit planning. In addition, we examine the effects of incentive compensation and a consulting role across two routine internal audit tasks — an objective tests of controls task and a subjective inventory valuation task — to evaluate whether their effects are contingent upon task subjectivity (i.e., opportunity to bias audit evaluations). Seventy‐six external auditors from four Big 5 public accounting firms participated in an experiment that manipulated internal auditor compensation (fixed salary versus incentive compensation), the type of work that the internal auditors routinely perform (primarily auditing versus primarily consulting), and audit task subjectivity (objective tests of controls versus subjective inventory valuation). Our results suggest that the nature of internal auditors' compensation and work affect audit planning recommendations differently. The opportunity to receive incentive compensation results in less reliance on internal auditors' work and greater budgeted audit hours, but only for the subjective task. Although a consulting role decreases perceived internal auditor objectivity, it has a limited effect on planning recommendations. Specifically, consulting has no effect on reliance, and leads to greater budgeted audit hours only when incentive compensation is available. We discuss potential explanations for the results as well as implications for audit research, practice, and regulation.     

Managerial Discretion and Task Interdependence in Teams

This study investigates whether task interdependence in teams alters the effectiveness of managerial discretion in motivating team performance. Teams are particularly useful when employees' tasks are interdependent—that is, when the degree to which the increase in team performance resulting from a team member's effort depends on the effort and skills of the other team members. The reason is that the more interdependent tasks are, the more employees need to coordinate their actions and help one another to achieve their objectives. Prior research analyzing settings where task interdependence is absent suggests that providing managers with discretion over team bonus allocation can improve team performance relative to equal team bonus allocations because it strengthens the link between contributions to team output and rewards. Economic theory suggests that managerial discretion will also improve team performance when task interdependence is present and information is efficiently used. However, we use behavioral theory to predict that managerial discretion is less effective in the presence of task interdependence, because managers do not fully incorporate all relevant information into bonus decisions and because managerial discretion hurts coordination and helping, which is particularly problematic under task interdependence. We find that while discretion over compensation has a positive effect on team performance relative to equal bonus allocation when task interdependence is absent, it has a negative effect when task interdependence is present. Additional analyses provide support for our underlying theory. Results of our study contribute to both theory and practice by suggesting that, ironically, managerial discretion may be most useful when the potential benefits of employing teams are lowest and least useful when the potential benefits are highest. Our results help explain why firms often grant managers only partial or no discretion over team members' compensation.     

Employment-Based Health Insurance and the Effectiveness of Intrafirm Competition between Insurance Providers

This paper examines the effects of competition between insurers for the patronage of a firm's employees. Since for employment-based health insurance the employee choice of health insurance plans is often limited, the availability of competing plans in the market does not necessarily reflect competition within the firm. We utilize data from the 1987 National Medical Expenditures Survey (NMES) to examine the effect of intra firm competition in the employment-based health insurance market. Using switching regression models, we explore the process that sets premiums and the process that sets the net premium/medical cost margins. We find that greater choice results in higher margins and lower premiums. We also find significantly negative health maintenance organization choice effects on both premiums and margins.