Don't Ask Me If You Will Not Listen: The Dilemma of Consultative Participation

References

• Allport G (1945) Psychology of participation. Psych. Rev. 53:117–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Babcock L, Loewenstein G (1997) Explaining bargaining impasse: The role of self-serving Biases. J. Econom. Perspect. 11:109–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Babcock L, Loewenstein G, Issacharoff S, Camerer C (1995) Biased judgments of fairness in bargaining. Amer. Econom. Rev. 85:1337–1443.Google Scholar
• Barker L (1971) Listening Behavior (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Bohnet I, Frey B (1999) The sound of Sliwence in prisoner's dilemma and dictator games. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 38:43–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton G, Ockenfels A (2000) A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100:166–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brandts J, Cooper D (2007) It's what you say, not what you pay: An experimental study of manager-employee relationships in overcoming coordination failure. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 5:1223–1268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caillaud B, Tirole J (2007) Consensus building: How to persuade a group. Amer. Econom. Rev. 9:1877–1900.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C, Malmendier U (2007) Behavioral economics of organizations. Diamond P, Vartiainen H, eds. Behavioral Economics and Its Applications (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 235–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Dufwenberg M (2006) Promises and partnership. Econometrica 74:1579–1601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Haruvy E (2000) Self-serving biases: Evidence from a simulated labour relationship. J. Managerial Psych. 15:655–667.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Kuhn P (2011) Lab labor: What can labor economists learn from the lab? Ashenfelter O, Card D, eds. Handbook of Labor Economics, 4th ed., Chap. 3 (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 229–330.Google Scholar
• Charness G, Rabin M (2002) Understanding social preferences with simple tests. Quart. J. Econom. 117:817–869.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Cobo-Reyes R, Jiménez N, Lacomba J, Lagos F (2012) The hidden advantage of delegation: Pareto-improvements in a gift-exchange game. Amer. Econom. Rev. 102:2358–2379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cialdini R (1993) Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (Harper Collins, New York).Google Scholar
• Cotton J, Vollrath D, Froggatt K, Lengnick-Hall M, Jennings K (1988) Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Acad. Management J. 13:8–22.Google Scholar
• Cotton J, Vollrath D, Lengnick-Hall M, Froggatt K (1990) Fact: The form of participation does matter-a rebuttal to leana, locke, and schweiger. Acad. Management Rev. 15:37–146.Google Scholar
• Dickinson D, Villeval M (2008) Does monitoring decrease work effort? The complementarity between agency and crowding-out theories. Games Econom. Behav. 63:56–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dewatripont M, Tirole J (1999) Advocates. J. Political Econom. 107:1–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Fehr E (2003) Why labour market experiments? Labour Econom. 10:399–406.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Kosfeld M (2006) The hidden costs of control. Amer. Econom. Rev. 96:1611–1630.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Zimmermann F (2011) Preferences for consistency. IZA Discussion Paper 5840, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
• Farrell J, Gibbons R (1989) Cheap talk with two audiences. Amer. Econom. Rev. 79:1214–1223.Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Falk A (2002) Psychological foundations of incentives. Eur. Econom. Rev. 46:687–724.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Gächter S (2000) Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90:980–994.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Schmidt K (1999) A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quart. J. Econom. 114:817–868.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Gächter S, Kirchsteiger G (1997) Reciprocity as a contract enforcement device: Experimental evidence. Econometrica 65:833–860.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Herz H, Wilkening T (2013) The lure of authority: Motivation and incentive effects of power. Amer. Econom. Rev. 103:1325–1359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Kirchsteiger G, Riedl A (1993) Does fairness prevent market clearing? An experimental investigation. Quart. J. Econom. 108:437–459.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Klein A, Schmidt K (2007a) Adding a stick to the carrot? The interaction of bonuses and fines. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97:177–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Klein A, Schmidt K (2007b) Fariness and contract design. Econometrica 75:121–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman R, Rogers J (1999) What Workers Want (ILR Press, Ithaca, NY).Google Scholar
• Frey B (1993a) Does monitoring increase work effort? The rivalry with trust and loyalty. Econom. Inquiry 31:663–670.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frey R (1993b) Empowerment or else. Harvard Bus. Rev. 71:80–88.Google Scholar
• Gächter S, Renner E (2010) The effects of (incentivized) belief elicitation in public good experiments. Experiment. Econom. 13:364–377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goleman D (1995) Emotional intelligence. Bantam International, New York.Google Scholar
• Goleman D (1998) What makes a leader? Harvard Bus. Rev. 76: 93–102.Google Scholar
• Hoffman E, McCabe K, Smith V (1996) Social distance and other regarding behavior in dictator games. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86:653–660.Google Scholar
• Konow J (2000) Fair shares: Accountability and cognitive dissonance in allocation decisions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90:1072–1092.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Konow J (2003) Which is the fairest one of all? A positive analysis of justice theories. J. Econom. Literature 41:1186–1237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korsgaard M, Roberson L (1995) Procedural justice in performance evaluation—The role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. J. Management 21:657–669.Google Scholar
• Lam S, Chen X, Schaubroeck J (2002) Participative decision making and employee performance in different cultures: The moderating effects of allocentrism-idiocentrism and efficacy. Acad. Management J. 45:905–914.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawler E (1988) Choosing an involvement strategy. Acad. Management Executive 11:197–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawler E (1990) High-Involvement Management: Participative Strategies for Improving Organizational Performance (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Lawler E (1993) Creating the high-involvement organization. Galbraith JR, Lawler EE III, eds. Organizing for the Future: The New Logic for Managing Complex Organizations (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco), 172–193.Google Scholar
• Lawler E, Mohrman S, Ledford G Jr (1992) Employee Involvement and Total Quality Management: Practices and Results in Fortune 1,000 Companies (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Lawler E, Mohrman S, Ledford G Jr (1998) Strategies for High Performance Organizations—The CEO Report: Employee Involvement, TQM, and Reengineering Programs in Fortune 1,000 Corporations (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Leana C, Locke E, Schweiger D (1990) Fact and fiction in analyzing research on participative decision making: A Critique of Cotton, Vollrath, Froggatt, Lengnick-Hall, and Jennings. Acad. Management Rev. 15:137–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ledford G Jr (1993) Employee involvement: Lessons and predictions. Galbraith JR, Lawler EE III, eds. Organizing for the Future: The New Logic for Managing Complex Organizations (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco), 142–171.Google Scholar
• Li H (2001) A theory of conservatism. J. Political Econom. 109:617–636.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li H, Rosen S, Suen W (2001) Conflicts and common interests in committees. Amer. Econom. Rev. 91:1478–1497.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Locke E, Schweiger D (1979) Participation in decision making: One more look. New Directions Organ. Behav. 1:265–339.Google Scholar
• Locke E, Schweiger D, Latham G (1986) Participation in decision making: When should it be used? Organ. Dynam. 14:65–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lowin A (1968) Participative decision making: A model, literature critique, and prescriptions for research. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 3:68–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marrow AJ, Bowers DG, Seashore SE (1967) Management by Participation (Harper and Row, New York).Google Scholar
• McCaffrey D, Faerman S, Hart D (1995) The appeal and difficulties of participative systems. Organ. Sci. 6:603–627.Link, Google Scholar
• Milgrom P, Roberts J (1986) Relying on the information of interested parties. RAND J. Econom. 17:18–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller K, Monge P (1986) Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A meta-analytic. Acad. Management J. 29:727–753.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell TR (1973) Motivation and participation: An integration. Acad. Management J. 16:670–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth A (1995) Bargaining experiments. Kagel JH, Roth A, eds. Handbook of Experimental Economics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 253–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schweiger D, Leana C (1986) Participation in decision making. Locke E, ed. Generalizing from Laboratory to Field Settings (Lexington Books 2, Lexington, MA), 242–263.Google Scholar
• Sliwka D (2007) Trust as a signal of a social norm and the hidden costs of incentive schemes. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97:999–1012.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner J, Gooding R (1987a) Effects of societal trends on participation research. Admin. Sci. Quart. 32:241–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner J, Gooding R (1987b) Shared influence and organizational behavior: A meta-analysis of situational variables expected to moderate participation-outcome relationships. Acad. Management J. 30:524–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner J, Leana C, Locke E, Schweiger D (1997) Cognitive and motivational frameworks in U.S. research on participation: A meta-analysis of primary effects. J. Organ. Behav. 18:49–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiley C (1997) What motivates employees according to over 40 years of motivation surveys. Internat. J. Manpower 18: 263–280.Crossref, Google Scholar