Job Market Paper:

Comparing Oranges to Oranges: A Field Experiment on Productivity and Team Competition

• Working paper (link)

• Keynes Fund (∼£11,000 grant)

• Abstract:
  Different dimensions of productivity often require distinct incentive mechanisms, particularly when they are not equally observable. I run a randomized controlled trial with three Spanish citrus firms, where workers are paid per kilogram harvested, so quantity is individually observed and rewarded, while quality is measured only at the team level. This leads to worker-related fruit damage, for which 60% of the operational costs are unrecoverable. Given wage rigidity and binding quantity quotas, a work-quality incentive must layer onto the piece rate without weakening it. I introduce a monthly team competition for three periods in which, within each firm, the team with the lowest rate of work-quality defects receives a prize. I develop a theoretical model in a multitasking setting with a contest success function, belief updating, and skill heterogeneity. I complement the analysis with administrative data and pre- and post-intervention surveys on teams' experience, beliefs, competitiveness, and social dynamics. I find that the competition initially leads to a significant increase in work quality, saving 60,000€ in monthly costs, but the effect fades as inexperienced non-winning teams update their beliefs and reduce effort due to declining motivation. The intervention is especially effective among experienced teams with local leaders, reducing overall food waste by 12%. However, it backfires for overconfident teams with non-local leaders. Importantly, quantity remains unchanged throughout the intervention, so the competition does not lead to a trade-off between quantity and work quality.

Working Papers:

Social Value Orientation and Unequal Productivity: Optimising Collaboration in the Workplace   (under review)

• Cambridge WP in Economics and Janeway Institute WP (link) 

• Keynes Fund (∼£14,000 grant)

• Abstract:
  Understanding the drivers of prosocial behavior in collaborative work settings, particularly under conditions of unequal productivity, is essential for effective team management. This paper explores how collaborative behavior is influenced by two factors: workers' social value orientation and the origins of productivity differences  – whether they are exogenous or arise from endogenous effort-based factors that may trigger an entitlement effect. I develop a theoretical model that accurately measures efficient coworker matching considering their altruism and inequality aversion levels required for optimal work collaboration in the presence of a productivity gap. Their salaries are tied to their productivity level, and equilibria are unaffected by belief variations. The role of social preferences and the entitlement effect are tested through an online experiment. Results indicate that both factors significantly increase collaboration among higher-productivity workers, while workers with lower productivity due to exerting less effort and those with higher degrees of altruism reduce their collaboration choices when there is a large payoff gap. Additionally, I demonstrate that the entitlement effect can create preference inconsistencies between lower-productivity individuals’ revealed preferences and their actual behavior. These findings highlight the importance of considering the origins of productivity inequalities to design collaborative environments that enhance team performance. By understanding the nuances of social values and work context, managers can better predict collaboration tendencies and encourage effective teamwork.
  
  

The Effects of Confidence Awareness on Financial Literacy and Behaviour   (with Ines Lee, Christopher Rauh, and Eileen Tipoe)   (under review)

• BSE working paper (link)

• Abstract:
  This paper examines whether increasing individuals' awareness of their own confidence can influence financial behaviour. In a pre-registered online experiment with nearly 3,000 U.S. adults, we test the effects of a novel metacognitive intervention: personalised feedback on implicit confidence about one's financial abilities, as measured by a custom Implicit Association Test (IAT), paired with an explanation of the importance of self-confidence in financial abilities. Treated participants show a significant reduction in "don’t know" responses on financial literacy tests and their performance in an incentivised investment task significantly improves: treated participants are less likely to make clearly dominated choices, more likely to select efficient allocations, and choose portfolios closer to the efficient frontier. These effects persist two weeks later in a follow-up survey with obfuscated framing. Heterogeneity analyses show stronger effects for females and for participants who understate their confidence (i.e., whose reported confidence is lower than what their IAT suggests). 

Work in Progress:

Combating the Loneliness Epidemic: A Field Experiment on Social Media and Face-to-Face Connection  (with Karthik Srinivasan)

Team Dynamics at Work and Consumer Satisfaction: A Field Experiment with Companies  (with Faisal Katan, John A. List, and Julia Seither)