Tom Schwantje

I am a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Bocconi University, where I am affiliated with IGIER and FINAFRICA.

My primary fields of interest are organisational economics and management, and their applications to development economics and finance. I am interested in the role organisations play in economic development both in their own right and by contributing to broader social objectives, and how their internal organisation supports this. My research increasingly focuses on the role of the financial sector in this process.

Many of my projects develop new (Bayesian) tools to measure management, such as the rules managers use to make decisions, management practices in banks, and management styles among young professionals.

Always happy to talk about these topics, please reach out!

Email: tom.schwantje@unibocconi.it

Curriculum Vitae

Working papers

Management as Rules: Evidence from an adaptive Bayesian questionnaire

[Draft]

Presentations: CSAE Research Workshop; Oxford Applied Micro Group; Workshop on Frontiers in Measurement and Survey Methods; Empirical Management Conference.

Abstract: It is well understood that most organisational practices are communicated and understood through rules, but these have traditionally been difficult to measure well. This paper develops a novel Bayesian survey method to empirically measure the use of managerial rules within organisations. The method implements an adaptive survey, incorporating Bayesian optimisation, to first understand decision-making in a potentially high-dimensional space. It uses the information from this method to then directly ask about the rules driving patterns in these decisions. I apply this tool to measure the rules used by senior HR managers at Ethiopian firms. Descriptively, I find that this measure robustly, positively correlates with firm performance and helps explain variation in performance across firms, in addition to more traditional measures of firm management. Using quasi-exogenous variation from firms' exposure to COVID-19, I further find that while managerial rules enhance firm performance, they also reduce resilience to economic shocks, suggesting a trade-off in the use of more rigid practices. The methods and findings in this paper motivate further research into the causal mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of managerial rules, and into understanding the factors influencing the heterogeneous adoption of such rules across organisations.

Management Style under the Spotlight: Evidence from Studio Vignettes Submitted

[Draft] [CEPR DP] [VoxDev] [VoxEU Podcast]

Joint work with Girum Abebe, Marcel Fafchamps, Michael Koelle and Simon Quinn

Presentations: City St George's (University of London)*, 10th CSEF-IGIER Symposium on Economics and Institutions, Princeton University*, the NBER Organisational Economics Working Group Spring 2025*, King's College London*, Queen's University (Firms and Inclusive Growth Workshop), Imperial College London*, CEPR Symposium*. (* if by coauthor)

Abstract: We introduce a new method for measuring managerial traits of young professionals: using management vignettes in a video studio. This method -- analysed through the lens of a Bayesian hierarchical model -- allows us to identify four distinct managerial archetypes (which we term `rule-based', `affiliative', `power-based' and `discretion-based'). We find that past labour market exposure (including exposure induced through a previous field experiment) correlates strongly with the propensity to act as a rule-based manager. We then use the videos to run an incentivised experiment with firm managers, to elicit preferences over young professionals. Strikingly, we find that firms consistently prefer the rule-based managerial style for entry-level managerial positions. Empirically, our results highlight an underexplored mechanism for labour market exclusion among young professionals. Methodologically, we demonstrate the value of controlled vignette scenarios for assessing managerial traits. Our findings underscore the importance of managerial training in shaping labor market outcomes, and offer new avenues for studying the development of managerial talent.

Banking under Conflict: Managers and Organisational Design Submitted

[Draft] [CEPR DP] [CSEF WP] [MoFiR WP]

with Nicola Limodio and Luca Picariello

Presentations: 10th CSEF-IGIER Symposium on Economics and Institutions*, EEA Congress 2025, CEPR-IMO Workshop (Bocconi), CEPR Governance in a Polarized World (POLECONFIN), EBRD Office of the Chief Economist Seminar, CEPR Symposium (* if by coauthor) Working Group in African Political Economy; 8th EBRD-CEPR Research Symposium: The Frontiers of finance in emerging markets; Upcoming: Groningen internal seminar; SIOE 2026 Conference

Abstract: How do organizations adapt internally when ethnic divisions intensify? We develop a model with an organization jointly choosing managerial assignment and delegation when locally-matched managers have better information but are less aligned with headquarters, and test it using a panel of Ethiopian bank branches. Exploiting variation in banks’ exposure to ethnic conflict through their branch networks, we find that conflict increases the appointment of locally-matched managers, while reducing their lending autonomy and leaving branch credit mostly unaffected. Conflict-exposed branches are more likely to be staffed by experienced insiders reassigned within the bank. An LLM-based CEO vignette exercise corroborates this mechanism.

Online Appendix

Organisational Values, Self-Image and Inclusion: Evidence from a Field Experiment Submitted

[Draft] [CEPR DP]

with Girum Abebe, Siân Brooke, Tom Gole and Simon Quinn

Presentations: CSAE Research Workshop (2023), Food for Thought Seminar (Bocconi), CSAE Conference 2025, Milan Experimental Coffee, CEPR-EBRD 3rd Accelerating growth for women entrepreneurs joint research conference (EBRD)

Abstract: We conduct a novel field experiment in Ethiopia to examine how institutional features influence inclusive decision-making. Specifically, we implement a business plan competition in which we vary (i) whether judges are reminded of the organization’s commitment to gender equality and (ii) whether judges must justify their decisions to peers. We find that highlighting organizational values substantially improves outcomes for high-quality female entrepreneurs, as determined by expert assessments and machine-learning predictions. In contrast, prompting judges to justify their decisions—thereby increasing social image concerns—does not improve female candidates’ success but does enhance consistency and agreement among judges, even without communication. Our findings suggest that simple institutional nudges promoting equal opportunity can enhance the quality of evaluative decisions and improve outcomes for high-potential female applicants.

Selected Work in Progress

Management, Internet and Financial Technology Adoption

with Nicola Limodio

Heterogeneity in Management Practices: A Bayesian Approach to Identifying Complementarities