Back to History

Fields Changed

Registration

Field Before After
Study Withdrawn No
Intervention Completion Date December 31, 2018
Data Collection Complete Yes
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization) 232 stores
Was attrition correlated with treatment status? No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations 346 apprentices
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms 149 apprentices (97 stores) control, 144 apprentices (101 stores) "Money"-treatment, 53 apprentices (34 stores) "Time"-treatment
Is there a restricted access data set available on request? No
Program Files Yes
Program Files URL https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.00484
Data Collection Completion Date March 16, 2020
Is data available for public use? No
Back to top

Papers

Field Before After
Paper Abstract Monetary incentives are widely used to align employee actions with employer objectives. We conducted a field experiment in a retail chain to evaluate whether an attendance bonus could reduce employee absenteeism. Apprentices in 232 stores were randomly assigned to a control group or one of two treatment groups in which a monetary or time-off attendance bonus was introduced for one year. We find that neither variant of the attendance bonus led to a systematic reduction in absenteeism. On the contrary, the monetary attendance bonus increased absenteeism substantially by around 50% on average, which corresponds to more than five additional days absent per employee and year. This effect was driven by the most recently hired apprentices. Survey results reveal that the monetary attendance bonus shifted the perception of absenteeism as acceptable behavior. The backfiring effect persisted beyond the end of the experiment, indicating a lasting erosion of social norms.
Paper Citation Jakob Alfitian, Dirk Sliwka, Timo Vogelsang (2023) When Bonuses Backfire: Evidence from the Workplace. Management Science 0(0).
Paper URL https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.00484
Back to top