2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2009.03.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discretionary rewards as a feedback mechanism

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
19
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Among others, awards motivate (1) because winning an award makes the recipient feel good about himself irrespective of monetary or status consequences, hence even without others knowing about the award, (2) because awards are typically conferred by a principal whose opinion the agent values, (3) because of the social prestige they generate and recognition they bring within the peer 9 Examples of recent economic works addressing aspects related to awards are analyses of status incentives (e.g. Auriol and Renault 2001, forthcoming, Dubey and Geanakoplos 2005, Ederer and Patacconi 2004, Loch et al 2001, and Fershtman et al 2001, of rewards as feedback (Sururov and van de Ven 2006), of social recognition (Brennan andPettit 2004 andEnglish 2005), of reciprocity (e.g. Gächter 2000, Fehr andSchmidt 2004), of identity (Akerlof and Kranton 2005), of conventions (e.g.…”
Section: The Nature Of Awardsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among others, awards motivate (1) because winning an award makes the recipient feel good about himself irrespective of monetary or status consequences, hence even without others knowing about the award, (2) because awards are typically conferred by a principal whose opinion the agent values, (3) because of the social prestige they generate and recognition they bring within the peer 9 Examples of recent economic works addressing aspects related to awards are analyses of status incentives (e.g. Auriol and Renault 2001, forthcoming, Dubey and Geanakoplos 2005, Ederer and Patacconi 2004, Loch et al 2001, and Fershtman et al 2001, of rewards as feedback (Sururov and van de Ven 2006), of social recognition (Brennan andPettit 2004 andEnglish 2005), of reciprocity (e.g. Gächter 2000, Fehr andSchmidt 2004), of identity (Akerlof and Kranton 2005), of conventions (e.g.…”
Section: The Nature Of Awardsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The mechanism that in the present model allows truth-telling to be sustainable is related to that studied in Suvorov and van de Ven (2009), who show that if the agent has intrinsic motivation to provide effort, the feedback role of performance assessments mitigates the reneging problem and makes subjective incentive schemes feasible even without infinite interaction. The present article does not presuppose that the agent is intrinsically motivated and instead studies the role of objective measures in sustaining subjective evaluations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…After all, the inclusion of assessment indicators defined by the subjective perception of stakeholders entails further to the risk of local specialization (desirable under certain conditions), the negligence of important elements overseen by their interests or perception. Therefore, any framework including subjective evaluation criteria as part of their assessment process should further include an objective (statistic) procedure for the correction of potential discrepancies and vice versa [58][59].…”
Section: Tourism Sustainability: An Integrative Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%