Effects of Employer-Enabled Performance-Linked Savings on Savings Behavior of Workers and Firm Performance in the Garment Industry

Last registered on January 09, 2024

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Effects of Employer-Enabled Performance-Linked Savings on Savings Behavior of Workers and Firm Performance in the Garment Industry
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0012460
Initial registration date
January 03, 2024

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
January 09, 2024, 10:42 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Michigan

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of Michigan
PI Affiliation
Good Business Lab
PI Affiliation
Good Business Lab

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-01-15
End date
2025-01-15
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Low-income individuals face several challenges in saving formally and regularly which their employers can uniquely help them overcome. Employers can offer access to a formal payroll account, assist with documentation, and arrange for automatic deductions from the salary.

In this study, we propose to conduct a Randomised Control Trial (RCT), wherein we offer a bank-based recurring deposit (RD) to production workers of Shahi Exports, a garment manufacturing firm in Karnataka, India. The RD would serve as a commitment saving instrument for workers, requiring fixed monthly instalments for 6 months. In our study, these instalments would be made from the workers’ salary through automatic payroll deductions facilitated by Shahi, their employer. Further, for some workers savings in their RD would be linked to and rewarded based on their tenure and attendance. With this set-up, the study is aimed at understanding if performance-linked employer-enabled commitment saving plans can simultaneously improve i) formal savings of low-income workers and ii) firm performance.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Adhvaryu, Achyuta et al. 2024. "Effects of Employer-Enabled Performance-Linked Savings on Savings Behavior of Workers and Firm Performance in the Garment Industry." AEA RCT Registry. January 09. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.12460-1.0
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
This study is a Randomised Control Trial, wherein we offer a bank-based recurring deposit (RD) to production workers of Shahi Exports, a garment manufacturing firm in Karnataka, India. The RD would serve as a commitment saving instrument for workers, requiring fixed monthly instalments for 6 months. In our study, these instalments would be made from the workers’ salary through automatic payroll deductions facilitated by Shahi, their employer. Further, for some workers savings in their RD would be linked to and rewarded based on their tenure and attendance. With this set-up, the study is aimed at understanding if performance-linked employer-enabled commitment saving plans can simultaneously improve i) formal savings of low-income workers and ii) firm performance.

Along with a control group, the study involves three treatment groups. The first treatment group only receives access to the RD and automatic deductions in it. Second and third treatment groups, in addition to the RD and payroll deductions, also receive rewards linking their savings and performance. Comparing these groups, we evaluate the causal impact of each component of the savings plan on workers’ savings in the plan, their total savings and on workplace outcomes in terms of attendance and tenure.
Intervention Start Date
2024-02-15
Intervention End Date
2024-08-15

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
For Participants' Savings :
1. Take-up of the offered savings plan
2. Usage of the offered savings plan, as measured by
a. number of deposits in a given time-period
b. sustained saving in the instrument (without premature closure)
3. Amount of savings in the offered savings instrument
4. Amount of savings in formal savings instruments
5. Amount of savings in informal savings instruments
6. Amount of total savings (across all owned savings instruments)

For Firm Performance :
1. Absenteeism among workers in the factory
2. Attrition among workers
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
It might be useful to describe how firm performance is measured.
1. Absenteeism is measured as the number of working days for which a worker was absent in a month.
2. Attrition is captured through workers' likelihood of exit in a given month. The last working day a worker was present in the factory is taken as the exit date of that worker.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Control - Business as usual. For these workers, the attendance bonus will be deposited in their payroll account, along with their salary.

Treatment 1 - Workers will be offered to open an RD and a zero-balance savings account linked to it. For these workers, the employer would deposit the amount equivalent to the attendance bonus in the RD linked savings account, while regular salary gets deposited in the payroll account as usual.

Treatment 2 - Workers will be offered the savings plan as described in Treatment 1. In addition, conditional on completing a tenure of 6 months with the employer, and continuing to hold the RD during this time, workers will be offered a top-up interest rate by the employer.

Treatment 3 - Along with all the offered savings plan and top-up interest rate mentioned in Treatment 2, workers will further get an attendance reward, which is proportionate to the total attendance bonus earned in the 6 months of the study.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomisation would done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Unit of randomisation would be an individual worker.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1200 workers
Sample size: planned number of observations
1200
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
300 workers in each of the treatment arms
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
15% take up among treatment 1 workers who are offered an RD and the the facility to automatic monthly deductions in it.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Good Business Lab Foundation
IRB Approval Date
2024-01-03
IRB Approval Number
GBL03012024