Accountability and ideology: When left looks right and right looks left
Managers face hard choices between process and outcome systems of accountability in evaluating employees, but little is known about how managers resolve them. Building on the premise that political ideologies serve as uncertainty-reducing heuristics, two studies of working managers show that: (1) conservatives prefer outcome accountability and liberals prefer process accountability in an unspecified policy domain; (2) this split becomes more pronounced in a controversial domain (public schools) in which the foreground value is educational efficiency but reverses direction in a controversial domain (affirmative action) in which the foreground value is demographic equality; (3) managers who discover employees have subverted their preferred system favor tinkering over switching to an alternative system; (4) but bipartisan consensus arises when managers have clear evidence about employee trustworthiness and the tightness of the causal links between employee effort and success. These findings shed light on ideological and contextual factors that shape preferences for accountability systems.
Volume (Year): 122 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp |
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Bouwens, J.F.M.G. & van Lent, L.A.G.M., 2007. "Assessing the performance of business unit managers," Other publications TiSEM b319acf4-637b-4b50-ab08-2, School of Economics and Management.
- repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-210600 is not listed on IDEAS
- Henderson, Rebecca., 1994. "The evolution of integrative capability : innovation in cardiovascular drug discovery," Working papers 3711-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
- Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2001. "Are Ceos Rewarded For Luck? The Ones Without Principals Are," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(3), pages 901-932, August.
- Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 1985. "Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 134-149, February.
- George Baker & Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1993.
"Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts,"
NBER Working Papers
4480, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Baker, George & Gibbons, Robert & Murphy, Kevin J, 1994. "Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(4), pages 1125-56, November.
- Mathieu Lefebvre & Ferdinand M. Vieider, 2010.
"Reining in Excessive Risk Taking by Executives : Experimental Evidence,"
1006, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique (GATE), Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Université Lyon 2, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
- Mathieu Lefebvre & Ferdinand Vieider, 2010. "Reining in Excessive Risk Taking by Executives : Experimental Evidence," Post-Print halshs-00464463, HAL.
- Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2007. "Adding a stick to the carrot? The interaction of bonuses and fines," Munich Reprints in Economics 20654, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
- Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 2007.
"Adding a Stick to the Carrot? The Interaction of Bonuses and Fines,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 177-181, May.
- Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2007. "Adding a Stick to the Carrot? The Interaction of Bonuses and Fines," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 197, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
- Robert Gibbons, 1998.
"Incentives in Organizations,"
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 115-132, Fall.
- Curley, Shawn P. & Yates, J. Frank & Abrams, Richard A., 1986. "Psychological sources of ambiguity avoidance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 230-256, October.
- Jan Bouwens & Laurence Van Lent, 2007.
"Assessing the Performance of Business Unit Managers,"
Journal of Accounting Research,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 667-697, 09.
- Bouwens, J.F.M.G. & van Lent, L.A.G.M., 2006. "Assessing the Performance of Business Unit Managers," Discussion Paper 2006-92, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Hanushek, Eric A, 1986. "The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in Public Schools," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 24(3), pages 1141-77, September.
- William G. Ouchi, 1979. "A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(9), pages 833-848, September.
- 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.
- Robert L. Simons, 2010. "Accountability and Control as Catalysts for Strategic Exploration and Exploitation: Field Study Results," Harvard Business School Working Papers 10-051, Harvard Business School.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:122:y:2013:i:1:p:22-35. See general 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: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.