Gift Exchange in the Workplace: Addressing the Conflicting Evidence with a Careful Test
Constança Esteves-Sorenson ()
Additional contact information
Constança Esteves-Sorenson: Yale School of Management, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06511
Management Science, 2018, vol. 64, issue 9, 4365-4388
Abstract:
Tests of gift exchange, wherein agents receive excess wages which are noncontingent on performance in one-shot settings, have yielded contradictory evidence: they sometimes find effort boosts, consistent with gift exchange, whereas they sometimes find no effort increases, consistent with a standard model. We identify eight confounds that could have led to the mixed evidence—agent disutility from being viewed as selfish, small samples, insufficient wage raises, an effort ceiling, fatigue, selection of abler workers, reemployment concerns, and peer effects—and run a comprehensive test addressing them. Our test consisted of a field experiment hiring workers for a data entry job, followed by laboratory games assessing their prosocial behavior. After addressing these confounds, we find that behavior during the field test was consistent with a standard model: workers did not repay fixed wage raises with an effort boost, but they did raise effort in response to a piece rate. The piece-rate scheme was also more efficient: the effort boost came at lower expense than paying fixed wage raises. Further, workers who behaved prosocially in laboratory games did not behave prosocially in the field.
Keywords: incentives; gift exchange; field experiments; laboratory experiments (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (15)
Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2801 (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:64:y:2018:i:9:p:4365-4388
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Management Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().