Communication, cooperation and collusion in team tournaments ? An experimental study
AbstractWe study the effects of communication in an experimental tournament between teams. When teams, rather than individuals, compete for a prize there is a need for intra-team coordination in order to win the inter-team competition. Introducing communication in such situations may have ambiguous effects on effort choices. Communication within teams may promote higher efforts by mitigating the internal free-rider problem. Communication between competing teams may lead to collusion, thereby reducing efforts. In our experiment we control the channels of communication by letting subjects communicate through an electronic chat. We find, indeed, that communication within teams increases efforts and communication between teams reduces efforts. We use team members? dialogues to explain these effects of communication, and check the robustness of our results.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck in its series Working Papers with number 2007-19.
Date of creation: Aug 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Universitätsstraße 15, A - 6020 Innsbruck
Web page: http://www.uibk.ac.at/fakultaeten/volkswirtschaft_und_statistik/index.html.en
More information through EDIRC
Tournament; Team decision making; Communication; Collusion; Free-riding; Experiment;
Other versions of this item:
- Sutter, Matthias & Strassmair, Christina, 2009. "Communication, cooperation and collusion in team tournaments--An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 506-525, May.
- Sutter, Matthias & Strassmair, Christina, 2007. "Communication, cooperation and collusion in team tournaments - An experimental study," Discussion Papers in Economics 2016, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
- J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2007-08-27 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2007-08-27 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2007-08-27 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-SPO-2007-08-27 (Sports & Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Frans van Dijk & Joep Sonnemans & Frans van Winden, 2000.
"Incentive Systems in a Real Effort Experiment,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
272, CESifo Group Munich.
- Nalbantian, Haig & Schotter, Andrew, 1994.
"Productivity Under Group Incentives: An Experimental Study,"
94-04, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- Nalbantian, Haig R & Schotter, Andrew, 1997. "Productivity under Group Incentives: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 314-41, June.
- David J. Cooper & John H. Kagel, 2005. "Are Two Heads Better Than One? Team versus Individual Play in Signaling Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 477-509, June.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Janette Walde).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.