No Gifts Returned: Surprise Bonuses Reduce Productivity in a Natural Field Experiment

References

• Abbink K, Herrmann B (2011) The moral costs of nastiness. Econom. Inquiry 49(2):631–633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abbink K, Sadrieh A (2009) The pleasure of being nasty. Econom. Lett. 105(3):306–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams JS, Rosenbaum WB (1962) The relationship of worker productivity to cognitive dissonance about wage inequities. J. Appl. Psych. 46(3):161–164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Akerlof GA (1982) Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Quart. J. Econom. 97(4):543–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Al-Ubaydli O, List JA (2019) How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment. Nature Human Behav. 3(1):33–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Al-Ubaydli O, Andersen S, Gneezy U, List JA (2015) Carrots that look like sticks: Toward an understanding of multitasking incentive schemes. Southern Econom. J. 81(3):538–561.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ambrose ML, Seabright MA, Schminke M (2002) Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational injustice. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processing 89(1):947–965.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bandiera O, Dahlstrand-Rudin A, Fischer G (2020) Incentives and culture: Evidence from a multi-country field experiment. Working paper, London School of Economics and Political Science, London.Google Scholar
• Bellemare C, Shearer B (2009) Gift giving and worker productivity: Evidence from a firm-level experiment. Games Econom. Behav. 67(1):233–244.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bewley TF (1999) Why Wages Don’t Fall during a Recession (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blanco M, Dalton PS, Vargas JF (2017) Does the unemployment benefit institution affect the productivity of workers? Evidence from the field. Management Sci. 63(11):3691–3707.Link, Google Scholar
• Bogliacino F, Jiménez Lozano L, Reyes D (2018) Socioeconomic stratification and stereotyping: Lab-in-the-field evidence from Colombia. Internat. Rev. Econom. 65(1):77–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton GE, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(1):166–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton GE, Brandts J, Ockenfels A (2005) Fair procedures: Evidence from games involving lotteries. Econom. J. 115(506):1054–1076.Google Scholar
• Bracha A, Gneezy U, Loewenstein G (2015) Relative pay and labor supply. J. Labor Econom. 33(2):297–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradler C, Neckermann S, Warnke AJ (2019) Incentivizing creativity: A large-scale experiment with performance bonuses and gifts. J. Labor Econom. 37(3):793–851.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradler C, Dur R, Neckermann S, Non A (2016) Employee recognition and performance: A field experiment. Management Sci. 62(11):3085–3099.Link, Google Scholar
• Breza E, Kaur S, Shamdasani Y (2018) The morale effects of pay inequality. Quart. J. Econom. 133(2):611–663.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C, Babcock L, Loewenstein G, Thaler R (1997) Labor supply of New York City cabdrivers: One day at a time. Quart. J. Econom. 112(2):407–441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cameron L, Shah M (2015) Risk-taking behavior in the wake of natural disasters. J. Human Resources 50(2):484–515.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cappelen AW, Hole AD, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2007) The pluralism of fairness ideals: An experimental approach. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(3):818–827.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G (2004) Attribution and reciprocity in an experimental labor market. J. Labor Econom. 22(3):665–688.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Frechette GR, Kagel JH (2004) How robust is laboratory gift exchange? Experiment. Econom. 7(2):189–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Rigotti L, Rustichini A (2007) Individual behavior and group membership. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(4):1340–1352.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clarke D (2021) RWOLF2: Stata module to calculate Romano-Wolf stepdown p-values for multiple hypothesis testing. Statistical Software Components S458970, Boston College Department of Economics, Chestnut Hill, MA.Google Scholar
• Cohn A, Fehr E, Goette L (2015) Fair wages and effort provision: Combining evidence from a choice experiment and a field experiment. Management Sci. 61(8):1777–1794.Link, Google Scholar
• Cohn A, Fehr E, Herrmann B, Schneider F (2014) Social comparison and effort provision: Evidence from a field experiment. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 12(4):877–898.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cullen Z, Perez-Truglia R (2022) How much does your boss make? The effects of salary comparisons. J. Political Econom. 130(3):766–822.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, List JA, Malmendier U, Rao G (2022) Estimating social preferences and gift exchange at work. Amer. Econom. Rev. 112(3):1038–1074.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmans A, Gabaix X, Jenter D (2017) Executive compensation: A survey of theory and evidence. Hermalin BE, Weisbach MS, eds. The Handbook of the Economics of Corporate Governance, vol. 1 (North-Holland and Elsevier Science & Technology, Amsterdam), 383–539.Google Scholar
• Edmans A, Gosling T, Jenter D (2023) CEO compensation: Evidence from the field. J. Financial Econom. 150(3):103718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Englmaier F, Leider S (2020) Managerial payoff and gift exchange in the field. Rev. Industrial Organ. 56(2):259–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Esteves-Sorenson C (2018) Gift exchange in the workplace: Addressing the conflicting evidence with a careful test. Management Sci. 64(9):4365–4388.Link, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Ichino A (2006) Clean evidence on peer effects. J. Labor Econom. 24(1):39–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Becker A, Dohmen T, Enke B, Huffman D, Sunde U (2018) Global evidence on economic preferences. Quart. J. Econom. 133(4):1645–1692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farber HS (2005) Is tomorrow another day? The labor supply of New York City cabdrivers. J. Political Econom. 113(1):46–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farber HS (2015) Why you can’t find a taxi in the rain and other labor supply lessons from cab drivers. Quart. J. Econom. 130(4):1975–2026.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Falk A (1999) Wage rigidity in a competitive incomplete contract market. J. Political Econom. 107(1):106–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Gächter S (1998) Reciprocity and economics: The economic implications of Homo Reciprocans. Eur. Econom. Rev. 42(3–5):845–859.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Gächter S (2000) Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. J. Econom. Perspective 14(3):159–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Goette L (2007) Do workers work more if wages are high? Evidence from a randomized field experiment. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(1):298–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quart. J. Econom. 114(3):817–868.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Glätzle-Rützler D, Sutter M (2013) The development of egalitarianism, altruism, spite and parochialism in childhood and adolescence. Eur. Econom. Rev. 64(1):369–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Goette L, Zehnder C (2009) A behavioral account of the labor market: The role of fairness concerns. Annu. Rev. Econom. 1(1):355–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Kirchsteiger G, Riedl A (1993) Does fairness prevent market clearing? An experimental investigation. Quart. J. Econom. 108(2):437–459.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frank RH (1985) Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Gächter S, Herrmann B (2009) Reciprocity, culture and human cooperation: Previous insights and a new cross-cultural experiment. Philosophical Trans. Roy. Soc. London B Biological Sci. 364(1518):791–806.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gächter S, Thöni C (2010) Social comparison and performance: Experimental evidence on the fair wage–effort hypothesis. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 76(3):531–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibbs M, Neckermann S, Siemroth C (2017) A field experiment in motivating employee ideas. Rev. Econom. Statist. 99(4):577–590.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilchrist DS, Luca M, Malhotra D (2016) When 3 + 1 > 4: Gift structure and reciprocity in the field. Management Sci. 62(9):2639–2650.Link, Google Scholar
• Gill D, Kissová Z, Lee J, Prowse V (2019) First-place loving and last-place loathing: How rank in the distribution of performance affects effort provision. Management Sci. 65(2):494–507.Link, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U, List JA (2006) Putting behavioral economics to work: Testing for gift exchange in labor markets using field experiments. Econometrica 74(5):1365–1384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagenlocher M, Delmelle E, Casas I, Kienberger S (2013) Assessing socioeconomic vulnerability to dengue fever in Cali, Colombia: Statistical vs. expert-based modeling. Internat. J. Health Geography 12(36):1–14.Google Scholar
• Harrison GW, List JA (2004) Field experiments. J. Econom. Literature 42(4):1009–1055.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heffetz O, Frank RH (2011) Preferences for status: Evidence and economic implications. Benhabib J, Bisin A, Jackson MO, eds. Handbook of Social Economics. Handbook of Economics (Elsevier Science, Burlington, VT).Google Scholar
• Hennig-Schmidt H, Sadrieh A, Rockenbach B (2010) In search of workers’ real effort reciprocity: A field and a laboratory experiment. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 8(4):817–837.Google Scholar
• Henrich N, Henrich J (2007) Why Humans Cooperate: A Cultural and Evolutionary Explanation, Evolution and Cognition Series (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A (2010) The weirdest people in the world? Behav. Brain Sci. 33(2–3):61–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hofstede GH (1980) Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values (Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA).Google Scholar
• Hofstede G, Hofstede GJ, Minkov M (2010) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival: Revised and Expanded Third Edition (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Holz J, List JA, Zentner A, Cardoza M, Zentner J (2020) The $100 million nudge: Increasing tax compliance of businesses and the self-employed using a natural field experiment. NBER Working Paper No. 27666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler RH (1986) Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76(4):728–741.Google Scholar
• Konow J (2000) Fair shares: Accountability and cognitive dissonance in allocation decisions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(4):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(4):1188–1239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kosfeld M, Neckermann S (2011) Getting more work for nothing? Symbolic awards and worker performance. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 3(3):86–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kube S, Maréchal MA, Puppe C (2012) The currency of reciprocity: Gift exchange in the workplace. Amer. Econom. Rev. 102(4):1644–1662.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kube S, Maréchal MA, Puppe C (2013) Do wage cuts damage work morale? Evidence from a natural field experiment. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 11(4):853–870.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuziemko I, Buell RW, Reich T, Norton MI (2014) “Last-place aversion”: Evidence and redistributive implications. Quart. J. Econom. 129(1):105–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lazear EP (1981) Agency, earnings profiles, productivity, and hours restrictions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 71(4):606–620.Google Scholar
• Lazear EP (2000) Performance pay and productivity. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(5):1346–1361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lemieux T, MacLeod WB, Parent D (2009) Performance pay and wage inequality. Quart. J. Econom. 124(1):1–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• List JA (2020) Non est disputandum de generalizability? A glimpse into the external validity trial. NBER Working Paper No. 27535, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• List JA, Rasul I (2011) Field experiments in labor economics. Card DE, Ashenfelter O, eds. Handbook of Labor Economics, Handbooks in Economics, vol. 4 (North-Holland, New York), 103–228.Google Scholar
• List JA, Shaikh AM, Xu Y (2019) Multiple hypothesis testing in experimental economics. Experiment. Econom. 22(4):773–793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martinsson P, Villegas-Palacio C, Wollbrant C (2015) Cooperation and social classes: Evidence from Colombia. Soc. Choice Welfare 45(4):829–848.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller DT, Ross M (1975) Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psych. Bull. 82(2):213–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nicklisch A, Paetzel F (2020) Need-based justice and distribution procedures: The perspective of economics. Traub S, Kittel B, eds. Need-Based Distributive Justice (Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland), 161–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ockenfels A, Sliwka D, Werner P (2015) Bonus payments and reference point violations. Management Sci. 61(7):1496–1513.Link, Google Scholar
• OECD (2002) Taking the measure of temporary employment. OECD Employment Outlook 2002 (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris), 127–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Romano JP, Wolf M (2005) Stepwise multiple testing as formalized data snooping. Econometrica 73(4):1237–1282.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shapiro C, Stiglitz JE (1984) Equilibrium unemployment as a worker discipline device. Amer. Econom. Rev. 74(3):433–444.Google Scholar
• Sliwka D, Werner P (2017) Wage increases and the dynamics of reciprocity. J. Labor Econom. 35(2):299–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• ter Weel B (2018) The rise of temporary work in Europe. Economist (Leiden) 166(4):397–401.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trautmann ST (2009) A tractable model of process fairness under risk. J. Econom. Psych. 30(5):803–813.Crossref, Google Scholar