Drivers of Effort: Evidence from Employee Absenteeism
Morten Bennedsen, Margarita Tsoutsoura, Daniel Wolfenzon
Journal of Financial Economics,
No. 3,
2019
Abstract
We use detailed information on individual absent spells of all employees in 4140 firms in Denmark to show large differences in average absenteeism across firms. Using employees who switch firms, we decompose days absent into an individual component (e.g., motivation, work ethic) and a firm component (e.g., incentives, corporate culture). We find the firm component explains 50%–60% of the difference in absenteeism across firms, with the individual component explaining the rest. We present suggestive evidence of the mechanisms behind the firm effect with family firm status and concentrated ownership strongly correlated with decreases in absenteeism. We also analyze the firm characteristics that correlate with the individual effect and find that firms with stronger career incentives attract lower-absenteeism employees.
Read article
A Concept of Incentive Ethics for the Enhancement of the Social Financial Security According to Hartz IV
Joachim Wilde
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 1,
2006
Abstract
Die Reformdiskussion für die soziale Grundsicherung für Erwerbsfähige konzentriert sich in der Regel auf eine Verbesserung der finanziellen Anreize zur Aufnahme einer Erwerbstätigkeit und auf Maßnahmen des “workfare“. Das vorliegende Papier verbreitert die Diskussion mit Hilfe eines Konzepts der Anreizethik. Dabei wird gezeigt, wie durch die Allokation sogenannter moralischer Güter durch die Mitarbeiter der Grundsicherungsbehörden zur Überwindung der Abhängigkeit von sozialer Grundsicherung angereizt werden kann. Das Konzept wird zunächst zur Bewertung der Hartz IV Reform genutzt. Es zeigt sich, dass diese teilweise zu einer Verschlechterung der Anreizstrukturen beiträgt. Der Artikel schließt mit Anregungen zur Beseitigung der aufgedeckten Mängel und mit einem Reformvorschlag im Sinne des anreizethischen Konzepts.
Read article
Non-market Allocation in Transport: A Reassessment of its Justification and the Challenge of Institutional Transition
Ulrich Blum
50 Years of Transport Research: Experiences Gained and Major Challenges Ahead,
2005
Abstract
Economic theory knows two systems of coordination: through public choice or through the market principle. If the market is chosen, then it may either be regulated, or it may be fully competitive (or be in between these two extremes). This paper first inquires into the reasons for regulation, it analyses the reasons for the important role of government in the transportation sector, especially in the procurement of infrastructure. Historical reasons are seen as important reasons for bureaucratic objections to deregulation. Fundamental economic concepts are forwarded that suggest market failure and justify a regulatory environment. The reasons for regulation cited above, however, may be challenged; we forward theoretical concepts from industrial organization theory and from institutional economics which suggest that competition is even possible on the level of infrastructure. The transition from a strongly regulated to a competitive environment poses problems that have given lieu to numerous failures in privatization and deregulation. Structural inertia plays an important role, and the incentive-compatible management of infrastructure is seen as the key element of any liberal transportation policy. It requires that the setting of rules on the meta level satisfies both local and global efficiency ends. We conclude that, in market economies, competition and regulation should not be substitutes but complements. General rules, an "ethic of competition" have to be set that guarantee a level playing field to agents; it is complimented by institutions that provide arbitration in case of misconduct.
Read article
