IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v6y2015i4p588-603d58362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of the Decision-Making Regime on Cooperation in a Workgroup Social Dilemma: An Examination of Cyberloafing

Author

Listed:
  • Brice Corgnet

    () (Argyros School of Business and Economics, Chapman University, 1 University Drive, Orange, CA 92866, USA
    Economic Science Institute, Chapman University, 1 University Drive, Orange, CA 92866, USA)

  • Roberto Hernán-González

    () (Business School, Nottingham University, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham, NG8 1BB, UK)

  • Matthew W. McCarter

    () (College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio, 1 UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA
    Economic Science Institute, Chapman University, 1 University Drive, Orange, CA 92866, USA)

Abstract

A burgeoning problem facing organizations is the loss of workgroup productivity due to cyberloafing. The current paper examines how changes in the decision-making rights about what workgroup members can do on the job affect cyberloafing and subsequent work productivity. We compare two different types of decision-making regimes: autocratic decision-making and group voting. Using a laboratory experiment to simulate a data-entry organization, we find that, while autocratic decision-making and group voting regimes both curtail cyberloafing (by over 50%), it is only in group voting that there is a substantive improvement (of 38%) in a cyberloafer’s subsequent work performance. Unlike autocratic decision-making, group voting leads to workgroups outperforming the control condition where cyberloafing could not be stopped. Additionally, only in the group voting regime did production levels of cyberloafers and non-loafers converge over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González & Matthew W. McCarter, 2015. "The Role of the Decision-Making Regime on Cooperation in a Workgroup Social Dilemma: An Examination of Cyberloafing," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:6:y:2015:i:4:p:588-603:d:58362
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/6/4/588/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/6/4/588/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eriksson, Tor & Poulsen, Anders & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2009. "Feedback and incentives: Experimental evidence," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 679-688, December.
    2. van Dijk, Frans & Sonnemans, Joep & van Winden, Frans, 2001. "Incentive systems in a real effort experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 187-214, February.
    3. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González & Eric Schniter, 2015. "Why real leisure really matters: incentive effects on real effort in the laboratory," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 284-301, June.
    4. Chen, Xiao-Ping & Bachrach, Daniel G., 2003. "Tolerance of free-riding: The effects of defection size, defection pattern, and social orientation in a repeated public goods dilemma," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 139-147, January.
    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. De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2019. "Free-riding and knowledge spillovers in teams: The role of social ties," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 74-90.
    2. repec:eee:bushor:v:61:y:2018:i:2:p:261-270 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Koch, Alexander K. & Nafziger, Julia, 2016. "Gift exchange, control, and cyberloafing: A real-effort experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 409-426.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    autocratic decision-making; cyberloafing; group voting; social dilemma; workgroup performance;

    JEL classification:

    • C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jgames:v:6:y:2015:i:4:p:588-603:d:58362. 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: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.