
doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1955164
handle: 10419/58183
We analyze competition between workers in a gift-exchange experiment where two workers are hired by the same employer. In the competition treatment the two employees simultaneously choose their effort whereas in the baseline treatment competition cannot occur since there is only one employee per employer. We find that in the competition treatment employers implicitly set tournament incentives by rewarding employees who choose higher effort levels than their co-workers. Here, employees' effort levels increase significantly faster, which can be explained by imitation learning. Furthermore we find that employers decrease their wage payments per unit of effort exerted over time when employing two workers.
Competition, ddc:330, M52, Internal Organization, L22, Gift Exchange, Gift Exchange,Competition,Internal Organization,Multiple Employees, C91, J41, Multiple Employees, jel: jel:C91, jel: jel:J41, jel: jel:L22, jel: jel:M52
Competition, ddc:330, M52, Internal Organization, L22, Gift Exchange, Gift Exchange,Competition,Internal Organization,Multiple Employees, C91, J41, Multiple Employees, jel: jel:C91, jel: jel:J41, jel: jel:L22, jel: jel:M52
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
