This paper reports the results of an experiment that examines how incentive-based compensation contracts compare to flat-wage compensation contracts in motivating individual learning and performance. I use a multiperiod cognitive task where the accounting system generates information (feedback) that has both a contracting role and a belief-revision role. The results suggest that incentives enhance performance and the rate of improvement in performance by increasing both: (1) the amount of time participants devoted to the task, and (2) participants' analysis and use of information. Further, I find evidence that incentives improve performance only after considerable feedback and experience, which may help explain why many prior one-shot decision-making experiments show no incentive effects. Collectively, the results suggest that incentives induce individuals to work longer and smarter, thereby increasing the likelihood that they will develop and use the innovative strategies frequently required to perform well in complex judgment tasks and learning situations.
When employees work hard, they exert more effort on job tasks (task effort); and when employees learn hard, they exert more effort to learn (learning effort). Task effort and learning effort are important causes of improved performance. This thesis investigates whether the use of tournament schemes motivates employees to work harder and learn harder, and also whether providing performance feedback in tournament schemes has any impact on task effort and learning effort.This thesis has three goals. The first is to investigate the relationship between incentives, learning, and performance. The literature on whether learning interacts with incentives to improve performance is inconclusive, because no prior research has provided a good test of this question (as noted by Bonner and Sprinkle 2002; Bailey and Fessler 2011; Bailey et al. 1998, and as remains true today). The second goal is to investigate the motivational effect of tournament schemes on effort. The literature suggests that effort is difficult to observe directly or to quantify; as a result, it is hard to verify whether tournament schemes motivate employees' task effort and learning effort. This thesis uses an eye-tracking device to measure effort, by measuring eye position, eye movements, and pupil size. The third goal is to investigate the effect of performance feedback on task effort, learning effort, and performance in the tournament setting.I posit and show evidence that both task effort and learning effort are higher in multiple-winner schemes than in either winner-takes-all schemes or piece-rate schemes. Task effort is directly positively associated with performance, while learning effort causes learning transfer to a job task, also yielding a positive effect on performance. I find that providing relative performance feedback in the tournament setting has no significant impact on task effort or learning effort.These findings have practical value for many corporations, which are constantly re-evaluating the effectiveness of their incentive schemes and reporting systems while investing in learning initiatives to help employees transfer learned skills to job tasks. Organizations may use the insights of this thesis to help them design learning initiatives and motivate employees to transfer learned skills to their job tasks.
Using data from a third-party survey on compensation practices at 151 Dutch firms, we show that less noisy or distorted performance measures and higher cash bonuses are associated with better-directed effort and improved employee selection. Specifically, 1) an increase in the cash bonus increases the selection effects of incentive contracts, but does not independently affect the effort that employees deliver, and 2) performance measure properties directly impact both effort and the selection functioning of incentive contracts. These results hold after controlling for an array of incentive contract design characteristics and for differences in organizational context. Our estimation procedures address several known problems with using secondary datasets.
Während variable Vergütungsmodelle in Großunternehmen, insbesondere innerhalb des Finanzsektors, bereits seit geraumer Zeit weit verbreitet sind, fand eine erfolgs- und leistungsorientierte Bezahlung in jüngerer Vergangenheit zunehmend auch in kleinen und mittelgroßen Unternehmen Eingang. Häufig genannte Ziele sind dabei die Steigerung der Motivation und eine erhöhte Leistung der Mitarbeiter. Am häufigsten kommen variable Modelle nach wie vor in der Führungskräftevergütung sowie der Entlohnung von Mitarbeitern im Vertrieb zur An-wendung (vgl. Böhmer, 2010). Jedoch geriet die leistungsabhängige Bezahlung im Zuge der Finanzkrise in die Kritik und sieht sich bis heute Vorwürfen ausgesetzt, sie setze falsche Anreize und führe zu einer problematischen Orientierung an kurzfristigen Gewinnzielen. In der Folge war seither, unterstützt von gesetzlichen Änderungen seitens der Politik, ein Trend hin zur Aufstockung der Grundgehälter in den Führungsebenen von Großunternehmen zu beobachten (vgl. Nienhaus, 2009; Fockenbrock, 2009). Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit dem experimentellen Beitrag von Sprinkle (2000), in dem die Wirkung von Anreizverträgen auf die Leistung von Probanden in Situationen untersucht wird, in denen diese durch Erfahrung und Feedback hinzulernen können. Hierzu stellt der Autor eine mehrperiodische, kognitive und eindimensionale Aufgabe und vergleicht den Effekt der erfolgsorientierten Vergütung mit dem eines Festgehalts. Erkenntnisse früherer Studien (vgl. z.B. Arkes et al., 1986; Ashton, 1990; Hogarth et al., 1991) mit vergleichbarem Ansatz (mehrperiodisch, kognitiv) zeigen hierbei, dass der oftmals intuitiv vermutete Zusammenhang, eine variable Vergütung steigere die Leistung gegenüber eines Fixgehalts, möglicherweise nicht zutrifft. Schwächen in der Ausgestaltung dieser Experimente hinsichtlich der verwendeten Anreizverträge und der Qualität des Feedbacks liefern einen Erklärungsversuch für deren Ergebnisse und geben Anlass für eine weitere Untersuchung (vgl. Sprinkle, 2000, S. 302). Gegenstand von Kapitel 2 dieser Seminararbeit ist die Herleitung der Hypothesen von Sprinkle (2000). Das dritte Kapitel beinhaltet eine Analyse des Experimentaufbaus, gefolgt von einer Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse. Kapitel 4 liefert eine Diskussion des Lösungsansatzes und zeigt mögliche Implikationen für die Praxis auf.
Excerpt from Effects of Incentive Contracts in Research and Development: A Preliminary Research Report In the past several years an effort has originated in the Defense Department (and followed by other government agencies) to discourage the use of cost-p1us=fixed fee (cpff) contracts and substitute contractual incentive arrangements. This effort supposedly relies upon the profit motive to reduce requirements for direct government control and to stim ulate better contractor performance and cost estimating. Incentive type contracts are not new in government contracting. Production contracts have been awarded on a fixed price basis for many years. The fixed price contract provides maximum correlation of contract profits with contract cost, and in theory might offer maximum cost incentive. How ever the use of incentive arrangements on r&d contracts is the novel feature of the dod (and nasa) programs of the past several years. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Accountants are concerned about the impact of incentive contracts on performance. Monetary incentives improve overall performance, but their effects on the components of performance are not well known. Performance on a repetitive task includes initial performance, subsequent improvement rate, and performance after learning ceases. Monetary incentives can affect any of these factors. This study examines the impact of piece-rate and goal-contingent incentives, versus fixed-pay, on initial performance and subsequent improvement rate in an assembly task. Previous literature has not simultaneously examined these components, which are homologous with the components of the industrial learning curve model. We find that both overall and initial performance, but not improvement rate, are higher in the incentive-pay groups. Two factors may explain the lack of differential improvement rates: subjects? effort allocation, since improving initial performance may be easier than improving subsequent performance; and the nature of these typical incentive-pay plans, which do not reward improvement directly.
This book contributes to the current discussion in society, politics and higher education on innovation capacity and the financial and non-financial incentives for researchers. The expert contributions in the book deal with implementation of incentive systems at higher education institutions in order to foster innovation. On the other hand, the book also discusses the extent to which governance structures from economy can be transferred to universities and how scientific performance can be measured and evaluated. This book is essential for decision-makers in knowledge-intensive organizations and higher-educational institutions dealing with the topic of performance management.
This study investigates the performance feedback and goal achievability in incentive effects on employees' effort and performance. We perform an experiment to examine whether the use of goal-specific feedback and incentive contracts have an interaction effect on task performance. Using the Mirametrix S2 eye tracking device to measure the level of effort, we find that the feedback effect on effort depend on goal achievability specified in the incentive contract. Specifically, we find that when employees are contracted based on achievable goals, feedback decreases their level of effort. By contrast, when employees are contracted based on more challenging but attainable goals, feedback increases their level of effort. Furthermore, we find that the level of effort has a significant positive impact on task performance. These findings have important implications for the design of control and compensation systems in organizations that aim for a higher employees' performance.
