<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Compensation Packages; Payment Methods</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/concept/jel-J33/</link>
    <description>Recent publications classified by JEL Code J33</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Social Relations and Relational Incentives
 (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32667/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-05-16T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        This paper studies how social relationships between managers and employees affect relational incentive contracts. To this end we develop a simple dynamic principal-agent model where both players may have feelings of altruism or spite toward each other. The contract may contain two types of incentives for the agent to work hard: a bonus and a threat of dismissal. We find that good social relationships undermine the credibility of a threat of dismissal but strengthen the credibility of a bonus. Among others, these two mechanisms imply that better social relationships sometimes lead to higher bonuses, while worse social relationships may increase productivity and players' utility in equilibrium.


      </description>
      <author>Dur, A.J.</author> <author>Tichem, J.</author>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Risk Aversion and Effort in an Incentive Pay Scheme with Multiplicative Noise: Theory and Experimental Evidence (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32031/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-03-20T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        The application of the classical "linear" model of incentive pay to the case when the noise is multiplicative to effort generates two predictions for a given strength of incentives: 1) more risk-averse workers will put in less effort, and 2) setting a performance target will weaken the negative risk aversion--effort link. The data from a real-effort laboratory experiment involving 85 student participants support both these predictions. Implications of the model and empirical findings to the literature on, and practice of, personnel management are discussed.
      </description>
      <author>Zubanov, N.V.</author>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Key issues in the design of pay for performance programs (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/31002/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-09-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        Pay for performance (P4P) is increasingly being used to stimulate healthcare providers to improve their performance. However, evidence on P4P effectiveness remains inconclusive. Flaws in program design may have contributed to this limited success. Based on a synthesis of relevant theoretical and empirical literature, this paper discusses key issues in P4P-program design. The analysis reveals that designing a fair and effective program is a complex undertaking. The following tentative conclusions are made: (1) performance is ideally defined broadly, provided that the set of measures remains comprehensible, (2) concerns that P4P encourages "selection" and "teaching to the test" should not be dismissed, (3) sophisticated risk adjustment is important, especially in outcome and resource use measures, (4) involving providers in program design is vital, (5) on balance, group incentives are preferred over individual incentives, (6) whether to use rewards or penalties is context-dependent, (7) payouts should be frequent and low-powered, (8) absolute targets are generally preferred over relative targets, (9) multiple targets are preferred over single targets, and (10) P4P should be a permanent component of provider compensation and is ideally "decoupled" form base payments. However, the design of P4P programs should be tailored to the specific setting of implementation, and empirical research is needed to confirm the conclusions. 
      </description>
      <author>Eijkenaar, F.</author>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Peer Evaluation: Incentives and Co-Worker Relations (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19650/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-05-28T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        In many workplaces co-workers have the best information about each other's effort. Managers may attempt to exploit this information through peer evaluation. I study peer evaluation in a pure moral hazard model of production by two limitedly liable agents. Agents receive a signal about their colleague's effort level, and are asked to report it to the principal. The principal may give an individual bonus for the receipt of a positive evaluation by a colleague, which stimulates effort as long as signals are revealed truthfully. A cost of lying ascertains that there can be truthful revelation. I show that interpersonal relations between colleagues constrain the bonus for receiving a positive evaluation in order to keep evaluations truthful. Still, the principal will always include such a bonus in the optimal contract, and possibly complement it with a team bonus. Co-worker relations have non-monotic effects on profits in the optimal contract.
      </description>
      <author>Sol, J.</author>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Optimal contracts when a worker envies his boss (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27800/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-05-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        A worker's utility may increase with his income, but envy can make his utility decline with his employer's income. This article uses a principal-agent model to study profit-maximizing contracts when a worker envies his employer. Envy tightens the worker's participation constraint and so calls for higher pay and/or a softer effort requirement. Moreover, a firm with an envious worker can benefit from profit sharing, even when the worker's effort is fully contractible. We discuss several applications of our theoretical work: envy can explain why a lower-level worker is awarded stock options, why incentive pay is lower in nonprofit organizations, and how governmental production of a good can be cheaper than private production. 
      </description>
      <author>Dur, A.J.</author> <author>Glazer, A.</author>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Where To Go? Workers' Reasons to Quit and Intra- versus Interindustry Job Mobility (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/6593/</link>
      <pubDate>2005-03-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        This paper employs survey data on the reasons to quit of Dutch job changers who entered or left a public sector job in 2001. We show that workers' reasons to quit their public sector job influence their decision to stay in or leave their industry of employment. A bad experience with, for instance, pay, work pressure, or job duties makes a change in industry more likely. Likewise, many workers who quit out of dissatisfaction with pay or management leave the public sector altogether. Lastly, it is shown that workers' reasons to quit fully explain the differences in wage growth between intra- and interindustry job movers.
      </description>
      <author>Delfgaauw, J.</author>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Optimal Incentive Contracts when Workers envy their Boss (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/6649/</link>
      <pubDate>2004-11-15T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>
        
        A worker's utility may increase in his own income, but envy can make his utility decline with his employer's income. Such behavior may call for high-powered incentives, so that increased effort by the worker little increases the income of his employer. This paper employs a principal-agent model to study optimal incentive contracts for envious workers under various assumptions about the object and generality of envy. Envy amplifies the effect of incentives on effort and, therefore, increases optimal incentive pay. Moreover, envy can make profit-sharing optimal, even when the worker's effort is fully contractible. We discuss several applications of our theoretical work. For example, envy can explain why lower-level workers are awarded stock options, why incentive pay is usually lower in non-profit organizations, and higher in larger firms. Envy may also make governmental production of a good more efficient than private production.
      </description>
      <author>Dur, A.J.</author> <author>Glazer, A.</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>