Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/306234 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Citation: 
[Journal:] Journal of Accounting Research [ISSN:] 1475-679X [Volume:] 62 [Issue:] 4 [Publisher:] Wiley [Place:] Hoboken, NJ [Year:] 2024 [Pages:] 1309-1361
Publisher: 
Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Abstract: 
This field experiment investigates how different levels of aggregation in relative performance information (RPI) impact employee performance in environments with multiple tasks. We randomly assign store employees of a retail chain to three groups: RPI on overall performance (control group), RPI on separate tasks, and RPI on both overall performance and separate tasks. We do not find evidence that providing separate task RPI instead of overall RPI affects performance or effort allocation. However, providing RPI on both overall performance and separate tasks seems to reduce performance, especially in the low‐return task. This suggests that detailed RPI directs employees' attention to the smaller benefits of low‐return tasks. We further find that only 30.5% of the employees accessed their performance reports, highlighting a distinction between providing RPI in the field and the laboratory. This study is based on a registered report accepted by the Journal of Accounting Research .
Subjects: 
relative performance information
multiple tasks
social comparison
field experiment
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.