IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v130y2015icp79-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Work-report formats and overbilling: How unit-reporting vs. cost-reporting increases accountability and decreases overbilling

Author

Listed:
  • Desai, Sreedhari D.
  • Kouchaki, Maryam

Abstract

The current paper examines how asking for a report of units of work completed versus cost of the same work can influence overbilling. We suggest that something as simple as asking for a report of units of work completed (for instance, reporting either the time spent or number of units of work completed) as opposed to the cost of the work completed can drive different unethical behaviors. We argue that unit-reporting makes providers feel accountable for their actions, and this induced accountability, in turn, impacts actual billing behaviors. We present seven studies, including a field experiment in the auto-repair industry that demonstrate the effect of different work-report formats on overbilling and provide evidence for our proposed underlying mechanism.

Suggested Citation

  • Desai, Sreedhari D. & Kouchaki, Maryam, 2015. "Work-report formats and overbilling: How unit-reporting vs. cost-reporting increases accountability and decreases overbilling," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 79-88.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:130:y:2015:i:c:p:79-88
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597815000758
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hochwarter, Wayne A. & Ferris, Gerald R. & Gavin, Mark B. & Perrewe, Pamela L. & Hall, Angela T. & Frink, Dwight D., 2007. "Political skill as neutralizer of felt accountability--job tension effects on job performance ratings: A longitudinal investigation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 226-239, March.
    2. Whillans, Ashley V. & Dunn, Elizabeth W., 2015. "Thinking about time as money decreases environmental behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 44-52.
    3. Gino, Francesca & Pierce, Lamar, 2009. "The abundance effect: Unethical behavior in the presence of wealth," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 142-155, July.
    4. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard," Post-Print hal-00814565, HAL.
    5. Slemrod, Joel & Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles, 2001. "Taxpayer response to an increased probability of audit: evidence from a controlled experiment in Minnesota," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 455-483, March.
    6. Andrew Hertzberg & Jose Maria Liberti & Daniel Paravisini, 2010. "Information and Incentives Inside the Firm: Evidence from Loan Officer Rotation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(3), pages 795-828, June.
    7. Siegel-Jacobs, Karen & Yates, J. Frank, 1996. "Effects of Procedural and Outcome Accountability on Judgment Quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Daniels, Bobbie W. & Booker, Quinton, 2011. "The effects of audit firm rotation on perceived auditor independence and audit quality," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 78-82.
    9. Daniel S. Nagin & James B. Rebitzer & Seth Sanders & Lowell J. Taylor, 2002. "Monitoring, Motivation, and Management: The Determinants of Opportunistic Behavior in a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 850-873, September.
    10. De Cremer, David & Dijk, Eric van, 2009. "Paying for sanctions in social dilemmas: The effects of endowment asymmetry and accountability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 45-55, May.
    11. Kouchaki, Maryam & Smith-Crowe, Kristin & Brief, Arthur P. & Sousa, Carlos, 2013. "Seeing green: Mere exposure to money triggers a business decision frame and unethical outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 53-61.
    12. Lamar Pierce & Daniel C. Snow & Andrew McAfee, 2015. "Cleaning House: The Impact of Information Technology Monitoring on Employee Theft and Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2299-2319, October.
    13. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00814565, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pettit, Nathan C. & Doyle, Sarah P. & Lount, Robert B. & To, Christopher, 2016. "Cheating to get ahead or to avoid falling behind? The effect of potential negative versus positive status change on unethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 172-183.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Welton Chang & Pavel Atanasov & Shefali Patil & Barbara A. Mellers & Philip E. Tetlock, 2017. "Accountability and adaptive performance under uncertainty: A long-term view," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(6), pages 610-626, November.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:6:p:610-626 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    4. Melanie de Waal & Floor Rink & Janka Stoker, 2015. "How internal and external supervisors influence employees' self-serving decisions," DNB Working Papers 464, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    5. Peecher, Mark E. & Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2013. "An accountability framework for financial statement auditors and related research questions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 596-620.
    6. William T Self & Gregory Mitchell & Barbara A Mellers & Philip E Tetlock & J Angus D Hildreth, 2015. "Balancing Fairness and Efficiency: The Impact of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Accountability on Applicant Screening," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Smulowitz, Stephen J. & Almandoz, Juan, 2021. "Predicting employee wrongdoing: The complementary effect of CEO option pay and the pay gap," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 123-135.
    8. Smulowitz, Stephen J. & Almandoz, Juan (“John”), 2021. "Reprint of “Predicting employee wrongdoing: The complementary effect of CEO option pay and the pay gap”," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 104-116.
    9. Eldor, Liat & Hodor, Michal & Cappelli, Peter, 2023. "The limits of psychological safety: Nonlinear relationships with performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    10. Zilola Sobirova, 2020. "Hoarding and Opportunistic Behavior During Covid-19 Pandemics: A Conceptual Model of Non-Ethical Behavior," International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 22-29, May.
    11. Casenave, Eric & Klarmann, Martin, 2020. "The accountability paradox: How holding marketers accountable hinders alignment with short-term marketing goals," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 95-108.
    12. Ruttan, Rachel L. & Lucas, Brian J., 2018. "Cogs in the machine: The prioritization of money and self-dehumanization," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 47-58.
    13. Xiao, Erte, 2017. "Justification and conformity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 15-28.
    14. Dean Yang, 2008. "Integrity for Hire: An Analysis of a Widespread Customs Reform," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(1), pages 25-57, February.
    15. Hershcovis, M. Sandy & Neville, Lukas & Reich, Tara C. & Christie, Amy M. & Cortina, Lilia M. & Shan, J. Valerie, 2017. "Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 45-57.
    16. Greg Fisher & Emily Neubert, 2023. "Evaluating Ventures Fast and Slow: Sensemaking, Intuition, and Deliberation in Entrepreneurial Resource Provision Decisions," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(4), pages 1298-1326, July.
    17. Bixter, Michael T. & Luhmann, Christian C., 2014. "Shared losses reduce sensitivity to risk: A laboratory study of moral hazard," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 63-73.
    18. Muel Kaptein, 2017. "The Battle for Business Ethics: A Struggle Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 343-361, August.
    19. Khanna, Poonam & Khan, Sarfraz A. & Krasikova, Dina & Miller, Stewart R., 2021. "Repeated engagement in misconduct by executives involved with financial restatements," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 194-203.
    20. Jingqiu Chen & Thomas Tang & Ningyu Tang, 2014. "Temptation, Monetary Intelligence (Love of Money), and Environmental Context on Unethical Intentions and Cheating," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 123(2), pages 197-219, August.
    21. Matthew J. Quade & Rebecca L. Greenbaum & Mary B. Mawritz, 2019. "“If Only My Coworker Was More Ethical”: When Ethical and Performance Comparisons Lead to Negative Emotions, Social Undermining, and Ostracism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 567-586, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:130:y:2015:i:c:p:79-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.