公平偏好对员工努力水平的影响——基于行为经济学观点的实证分析

行为经济学和行为博弈的一些实验研究显示,对收入公平性的判断是影响参与人的行为和分配偏好的一个重要因素。本文通过对我国不同地区保险代理人的问卷调查结果进行信度分析和回归分析,讨论了公平对待与员工努力水平之间的关系。研究结果表明,公平对待与员工努力水平之间存在显著的正相关关系,而这一点并不被传统管理者所重视。进一步得出结论,基于公平偏好的激励机制是改善员工的工作努力水平的一个重要手段。     

参与者公平偏好对协作型众包创新绩效激励机制的影响

协作型众包创新是以最大化创新绩效为目标的众包模式,相关实践案例已有所显现,但协作型众包创新过程中参与方的努力行为经常受到其公平偏好心理的影响。针对这一问题,采用委托代理理论,通过设计仅基于个人创新绩效(AR)和基于总创新绩效(TR)的两种激励机制提升协作型众包创新绩效,并深入探讨公平偏好对激励机制的影响。结果表明,AR机制中参赛者不可能出现利他性努力行为,而TR机制下利己性努力和利他性努力均与公平偏好负相关;两种激励机制下众包创新绩效均随公平偏好敏感度增大而下降,参赛者数量增加是否有利于提升众包创新绩效也取决于公平偏好程度;TR机制一定会产生比AR机制更高的众包绩效及发包方经济收益,但这种价值效应会被参赛者的公平偏好心理所弱化。     

基于公平偏好的实验经济学研究综述

传统经济学建立在自利性假设之上,认为参与人仅仅关心自身利益,即使出现有悖于自利性假设的行为,也只是暂时性的偏离。而最近二十多年的实验经济学研究对该假设提出了质疑,利用大量实验数据不仅证明了人类行为中公平偏好的存在性,而且还表明这种存在性绝非是暂时性的偏离,其对人类的行为决策具有很强的系统性影响。目前相关学术研究主要体现在公平偏好与其他社会偏好的区分、有关人类行为决策中公平偏好存在性的实验证明、基于结果的公平偏好与基于动机的公平偏好的差异以及公平偏好对传统激励契约产生的影响。本文指出了国外学术界对公平偏好实验中包括实验对象、货币金额和文化等方面的质疑,同时也揭示了未来进一步的研究方向,构成了有关公平偏好实验经济学的研究进展及前沿趋势。     

基于纵向公平偏好视角的委托代理模型及薪酬激励机制研究

在高管薪酬水平过高、企业内部薪酬差距过大的背景下,从纵向公平偏好的视角研究了企业内部的委托代理关系和薪酬激励机制,假设员工是具有嫉妒和自豪两种纵向公平偏好的风险规避者,设计了代理人具有纵向公平偏好的委托代理模型。通过模型求解得到如下结论:当总经理的预期净收入高于员工时,其期望效用随着员工纵向公平偏好强度的提高而减小;当总经理的预期净收入低于员工时,其期望效用随着员工纵向公平偏好强度的提高而增大。     

基于公平偏好下的风险企业家道德风险研究

风险企业家在向风险投资家寻求融资共同发展风险项目的过程中表现出有限理性,具有公平偏好心理,其往往因为嫉妒心理而影响到自身的努力水平,这样,风险投资中的道德风险问题不可避免,进而会损害到风险投资家的利益。本文从有限理性的角度出发,通过设计针对具有公平偏好的风险企业家的有效激励机制,以此来分析和防范公平偏好心理带来的道德风险问题。研究表明,风险投资家应尽可能选择公平偏好程度较小的风险企业家作为投资对象,以减少或规避风险投资市场中的道德风险。     

涉他偏好效用理论研究述评

"最后通牒"等一系列行为博弈实验显示,人们在追求自身收益的同时也会关注其他人的收益。而在此基础上发展的涉他偏好效用理论,成功解释了大量传统经济理论所不能解释的实验结果和经济现象,并能更为准确地预测经济行为。该文对目前涉他偏好效用理论的主要模型——互惠意图模型、不公平厌恶模型和社会福利偏好模型进行研究、比较和分析,为解决我国经济改革和经济转型中公平、互惠和社会效率等方面问题提供所需的理论依据。     

基于公平偏好的信息系统集成知识创新契约设计

基于公平心理客观上对协同主体决策过程的影响,引入F-S公平心理模型,构建了信息系统集成知识创新决策模型。得到结论:对于具有公平偏好心理的原系统服务商而言,其努力水平受嫉妒心理的影响,且随着嫉妒心理程度的提升而降低,道德风险随着努力水平的降低而增大;当原系统服务商付出最优努力水平时,它能有效规避道德风险。     

考虑公平偏好的两阶段众包创新激励机制研究

为解决多任务多阶段众包创新委托代理的激励问题,使接包方更努力完成任务,文章基于现代经济学公平偏好理论,建立了考虑任务参与者公平偏好的双任务两阶段委托代理模型.借助模型分析了众包创新过程中公平偏好程度与接包方的努力程度、产出分享比例及众包创新绩效等的关系.结果 显示,对称信息情况下公平偏好程度对众包创新的两个阶段产出效益无影响.非对称信息情况下随着公平偏好强度增大,发包方收益和接包方努力水平也在提高,而固定收入、产出分享系数在减小.通过模型仿真也发现公平偏好程度并不是越大越好,过于频繁地采取相同的激励措施会降低激励效果.     

企业学习效应和公平偏好对节能激励机制的影响

综合考虑了企业的学习效应和公平偏好等差异,建立了政府与企业间的节能激励契约。结果表明:初始实力强的企业节能可以提高政府的期望效用,而学习效应可以使政府获得额外效用;公平偏好对企业节能努力水平和学习水平的提高有阻碍作用,可以通过影响企业的学习效应进而影响政府的期望效用。     

公平偏好下收益共享契约供应链协调

供应链收益分配过程中零售商往往表现出公平偏好行为,文章研究了市场需求是随机的两阶段供应链中收益共享契约与供应链协调问题。在随机市场需求的收益共享契约基本模型的基础上,构建了考虑零售商公平偏好的收益共享契约模型,并通过数值分析了零售商公平偏好对收益共享契约协调供应链的影响。研究结果表明,将公平偏好这一行为因素引入到收益共享契约协调供应链问题中具有理论和实际意义,对收益共享契约具体的协调策略产生影响。     

Unfair inequality,governance and individual beliefs

Unfair inequality arises when incentives are not fairly tied to effort or investment across the socio-economic spectrum. The actual limitations on economic activity from this failure may depend on whether people believe the system is unfair, and how well governing institutions safeguard fair-play. In this paper, I study whether unfair wealth inequality is correlated with beliefs about fairness, and whether good governance can be a substitute in belief formations for decreases in unfair inequality. I find a that people in countries with recent increases in unfair wealth inequality are less likely to believe that inequality is due to fair processes. This relationship holds when“fair” determinants of inequality include effort, as well as moral and meritocratic components. The relationship is strongest in countries with poor quality governance. In countries with high quality governance, people appear to be more tolerant of unfair inequality, as it is only weakly reflected in their beliefs about process fairness.     

Individual sense of fairness: an experimental study

Many prior studies have identified that subjects in experiments demonstrate preferences for fair allocations. We present an experimental study designed to test whether a similar concern for fairness manifests itself when the decision maker is choosing among differing probabilistic allocation mechanisms that will all generate an ex post unfair allocation by assigning an indivisible prize to one individual. This investigation is inspired by Karni and Safra (Econometrica, 70, 263–284, 2002 ) in which a structure for preferences for fairness in such an environment was developed. Here we use this model to design experiments that allow us to test for the presence of concern for fairness in individual choice behavior and examine some factors that may affect the intensity of the concern for fairness.

---

Electronic Supplementary Material  The online version of this article () contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.      

Populism,Fairness and Competition: Should We Care and What Could We Do?

The rise of populism in a number of countries is one of the most visible signs of the weakening of enthusiasm for trade liberalization and market competition. Market competition is increasingly denounced as leading to unfair results by those who lose jobs, and in some cases risk losing their employment prospects because of the pressure of competition, or those who see their wages stagnate or be reduced. Their perception is that pro‐competitive policies benefit capitalists and a small coterie of highly skilled workers to the detriment of the low‐skilled majority. In a number of countries there have been calls by politicians to reconsider the trade liberalization policy which was actively pursued in recent decades and to change the standard applied by competition law enforcers from a strict consumer welfare standard to a consideration of the trade‐off between efficiency and fairness. The competition community has, to a large extent, strongly resisted such possibilities, arguing that protectionist policies had failed in the past and that the concept of fairness is at best vague, lack economic foundation, and could lead to a weakening of incentives to achieve efficient static and dynamic performances. The article examines three issues related to this debate. First, we examine the theoretical and practical reasons for which some categories of workers lose in the competitive process. Second, we discuss the relationship between inequality and fairness and the contribution of behavioural economics to the exploration of what people consider to be fair or unfair in vertical relationships (i.e. between employees and employers or between consumers and suppliers). Third, we discuss alternative ways in which competition authorities could reconcile fairness and efficiency in their advocacy or enforcement activities.     

论社会公平正义的地位及其实现途径

实现社会公平正义是社会主义社会的本质特征,是构建和谐社会的必然要求,是我国市场经济发展的客观需要。我国实现社会公平正义面临的突出问题主要表现为权利机会不公平、规则制度不公平、收入分配不公平。实现我国社会公平正义,要积极培育社会主义核心价值观,营造实现社会公平正义的思想氛围;着力推进科学发展,打牢实现我国社会公平正义的物质基础;加强制度建设,创造公平正义的社会环境。     

关于公平即是效率的经济模型分析

传统的观点把公平与效率看作是两个不等同的概念。通过引入行为经济学证实的"不公平厌恶"心理,建立了包含"不公平厌恶"心理的效用函数,进而构建了关于公平与效率的经济数学模型以及埃奇渥斯盒状图,从经济学上阐明:如果一种分配制度致使新增财富的分配不公可能不会带来每个人的帕累托改进。从而得出结论:公平是实现效率的必要条件,公平实际上是效率本身的一部分。     

Do unfair perceived own pay and top managers’ pay erode satisfaction with democracy?

Many people are relatively unsatisfied with the democratic system as it currently exists. In this empirical research note, the authors present evidence that German workers, who perceive their own pay or top managers’ pay as unfair, are on average significantly less happy with the democracy in Germany. Thus, fairness perceptions in the labour market and of income inequality seem to have spillover effects on the overall satisfaction with the democratic system.     

Income comparison and happiness: The role of fair income distribution

Relative income gap is one of the most popular approaches for explaining the income–happiness relationship. We argue in this article that when people compare their incomes, they care about distributional fairness more than relative income disparity. It is difficult for us to explain China's income–happiness paradox if we simply compare the income gap and do not explore the income‐generation process leading to income inequality. We therefore employ an approach based on a responsibility‐sensitive theory of justice that decomposes individual income into fair and unfair components. As a proxy for distributional unfairness, unfair income is considered the main source of unhappiness. Using data from the Chinese Household Income Project survey, we find strong support for the negative relationship between income unfairness and happiness. We also find a significantly positive relationship between the relative income gap and income unfairness, which leads us to consider the income comparison hypothesis as the explanation for the income–happiness paradox in a new light. Sensitivity analyses confirm the robustness of our results.     

浅析现阶段我国收入分配中的公平问题

现阶段,我国收入差距不断拉大,收入分配不公平的问题已经凸现,严重影响了社会主义和谐社会的发展.要解决收入分配存在的问题,必须正确理解公平原则,切实有效地采取措施调节收入分配,在分配领域特别是在再分配领域中更加注重公平,逐步实现公平与效率有机的、动态的结合,促进社会的和谐发展.