IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v24y2022i6p3060-3078.html

The Impacts of Algorithmic Work Assignment on Fairness Perceptions and Productivity: Evidence from Field Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Bing Bai

    (Olin Business School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri 63130)

  • Hengchen Dai

    (Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095)

  • Dennis J. Zhang

    (Olin Business School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri 63130)

  • Fuqiang Zhang

    (Olin Business School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri 63130)

  • Haoyuan Hu

    (Alibaba Group, Hangzhou 311101, China)

Abstract

Problem definition : We study how algorithmic (versus human-based) task assignment processes change task recipients’ fairness perceptions and productivity. Academic/practical relevance : Since algorithms are widely adopted by businesses and often require human involvement, understanding how humans perceive algorithms is instrumental to the success of algorithm design in operations. Particularly, the growing concern that algorithms may reproduce inequality historically exhibited by humans calls for research about how people perceive the fairness of algorithmic decision making (relative to traditional human-based decision making) and, consequently, adjust their work behaviors. Methodology : In a 15-day-long field experiment with Alibaba Group in a warehouse where workers pick products following orders (or “pick lists”), we randomly assigned half of the workers to receive pick lists from a machine that ostensibly relied on an algorithm to distribute pick lists, and the other half to receive pick lists from a human distributor. Results : Despite that we used the same underlying rule to assign pick lists in both groups, workers perceive the algorithmic (versus human-based) assignment process as fairer by 0.94–1.02 standard deviations. This yields productivity benefits: receiving tasks from an algorithm (versus a human) increases workers’ picking efficiency by 15.56%–17.86%. These findings persist beyond the first day when workers were involved in the experiment, suggesting that our results are not limited to the initial phrase when workers might find algorithmic assignment novel. We replicate the main results in another field experiment involving a nonoverlapping sample of warehouse workers. We also show via online experiments that people in the United States also view algorithmic task assignment as fairer than human-based task assignment. Managerial implications : We demonstrate that algorithms can have broader impacts beyond offering greater efficiency and accuracy than humans: introducing algorithmic assignment processes may enhance fairness perceptions and productivity. This insight can be utilized by managers and algorithm designers to better design and implement algorithm-based decision making in operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Bing Bai & Hengchen Dai & Dennis J. Zhang & Fuqiang Zhang & Haoyuan Hu, 2022. "The Impacts of Algorithmic Work Assignment on Fairness Perceptions and Productivity: Evidence from Field Experiments," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 3060-3078, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:24:y:2022:i:6:p:3060-3078
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2022.1120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1120
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2022.1120?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karel H. van Donselaar & Vishal Gaur & Tom van Woensel & Rob A. C. M. Broekmeulen & Jan C. Fransoo, 2010. "Ordering Behavior in Retail Stores and Implications for Automated Replenishment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 766-784, May.
    2. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K Morewedge, 2019. "Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 629-650.
    3. Nicholas Bloom & James Liang & John Roberts & Zhichun Jenny Ying, 2015. "Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(1), pages 165-218.
    4. Anja Lambrecht & Catherine Tucker, 2019. "Algorithmic Bias? An Empirical Study of Apparent Gender-Based Discrimination in the Display of STEM Career Ads," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 2966-2981, July.
    5. James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312.
    6. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    7. Maria R. Ibanez & Michael W. Toffel, 2020. "How Scheduling Can Bias Quality Assessment: Evidence from Food-Safety Inspections," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2396-2416, June.
    8. Ryan W. Buell & Tami Kim & Chia-Jung Tsay, 2017. "Creating Reciprocal Value Through Operational Transparency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(6), pages 1673-1695, June.
    9. Berkeley J. Dietvorst & Joseph P. Simmons & Cade Massey, 2018. "Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1155-1170, March.
    10. Yu Zhang & Vidyadhar Kulkarni, 2018. "Automated Teller Machine Replenishment Policies with Submodular Costs," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 517-530, July.
    11. Ernst Fehr & Lorenz Goette & Christian Zehnder, 2009. "A Behavioral Account of the Labor Market: The Role of Fairness Concerns," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 355-384, May.
    12. Falk, Armin & Fehr, Ernst & Fischbacher, Urs, 2008. "Testing theories of fairness--Intentions matter," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 287-303, January.
    13. Christopher T. Dawes & James H. Fowler & Tim Johnson & Richard McElreath & Oleg Smirnov, 2007. "Egalitarian motives in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 446(7137), pages 794-796, April.
    14. Tom Fangyun Tan & Serguei Netessine, 2019. "When You Work with a Superman, Will You Also Fly? An Empirical Study of the Impact of Coworkers on Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3495-3517, August.
    15. Xueming Luo & Siliang Tong & Zheng Fang & Zhe Qu, 2019. "Frontiers: Machines vs. Humans: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Disclosure on Customer Purchases," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 937-947, November.
    16. Cohen-Charash, Yochi & Spector, Paul E., 2001. "The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-Analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 278-321, November.
    17. Robert S. Huckman & Bradley R. Staats & David M. Upton, 2009. "Team Familiarity, Role Experience, and Performance: Evidence from Indian Software Services," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 85-100, January.
    18. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    19. Zeynep Akşin & Sarang Deo & Jónas Oddur Jónasson & Kamalini Ramdas, 2021. "Learning from Many: Partner Exposure and Team Familiarity in Fluid Teams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 854-874, February.
    20. Bradley R. Staats & Diwas S. KC & Francesca Gino, 2018. "Maintaining Beliefs in the Face of Negative News: The Moderating Role of Experience," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 804-824, February.
    21. Ryan W. Buell & Michael I. Norton, 2011. "The Labor Illusion: How Operational Transparency Increases Perceived Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1564-1579, February.
    22. Atul Bhandari & Alan Scheller-Wolf & Mor Harchol-Balter, 2008. "An Exact and Efficient Algorithm for the Constrained Dynamic Operator Staffing Problem for Call Centers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(2), pages 339-353, February.
    23. Diwas Singh KC, 2020. "Heuristic Thinking in Patient Care," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2545-2563, June.
    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. Baorui Li & Xincheng Ma & Brian Rongqing Han & Daizhong Tang & Lei Fu, 2025. "Human or Robot? Evidence from Last-Mile Delivery Service," Papers 2509.11562, arXiv.org.
    2. Warut Khern-am-nuai & Hyunji So & Maxime C. Cohen & Yossiri Adulyasak, 2024. "Selecting Cover Images for Restaurant Reviews: AI vs. Wisdom of the Crowd," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 330-349, January.
    3. Bowen Lou & Tian Lu & T. S. Raghu & Yingjie Zhang, 2025. "Unraveling Human-AI Teaming: A Review and Outlook," Papers 2504.05755, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2025.
    4. Annabel Jünke & Frederik Möller, 2026. "Beyond stuck in the middle: Application context and role integration of automated leadership in traditional organizations," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 36(1), pages 1-25, December.
    5. Yi Liu & Bowen Lou & Xinyi Zhao & Xinxin Li, 2024. "Unintended Consequences of Advances in Matching Technologies: Information Revelation and Strategic Participation on Gig-Economy Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(3), pages 1729-1754, March.
    6. Felipe Caro & Jean-Edouard Colliard & Elena Katok & Axel Ockenfels & Nicolas Stier-Moses & Catherine Tucker & D. J. Wu, 2026. "Introduction to the Special Issue on the Human-Algorithm Connection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 1-13, January.
    7. Andrew M. Davis & Shawn Mankad & Charles J. Corbett & Elena Katok, 2024. "OM Forum—The Best of Both Worlds: Machine Learning and Behavioral Science in Operations Management," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1605-1621, September.
    8. Yang, Yihao & Chi, Ming & Bi, Xinhua & Xu, Yongshun, 2025. "Dark sides of algorithmic control in app-based gig work: An objectification perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    9. Hongchang Wang & Yingjie Zhang & Tian Lu, 2026. "The Power of Disagreement: A Field Experiment to Investigate Human–Algorithm Collaboration in Loan Evaluations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 96-118, January.
    10. Ruth Beer & Anyan Qi & Ignacio Rios, 2026. "Behavioral Externalities of Process Automation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 575-593, January.
    11. Strobel, Christina, 2025. "The impact of process automation on performance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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. Yuqian Xu & Hongyan Dai & Wanfeng Yan, 2026. "Identity Disclosure and Anthropomorphism in Voice Chatbot Design: A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 223-241, January.
    2. Evgeny Kagan & Brett Hathaway & Maqbool Dada, 2025. "Deploying Chatbots in Customer Service: Adoption Hurdles and Simple Remedies," Papers 2504.06145, arXiv.org.
    3. Felipe Caro & Jean-Edouard Colliard & Elena Katok & Axel Ockenfels & Nicolas Stier-Moses & Catherine Tucker & D. J. Wu, 2026. "Introduction to the Special Issue on the Human-Algorithm Connection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Wang, Cuicui & Li, Yiyang & Fu, Weizhong & Jin, Jia, 2023. "Whether to trust chatbots: Applying the event-related approach to understand consumers’ emotional experiences in interactions with chatbots in e-commerce," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    5. Hamsa Bastani & Osbert Bastani & Wichinpong Park Sinchaisri, 2026. "Improving Human Sequential Decision Making with Reinforcement Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 733-755, January.
    6. Zhu, Yimin & Zhang, Jiemin & Wu, Jifei & Liu, Yingyue, 2022. "AI is better when I'm sure: The influence of certainty of needs on consumers' acceptance of AI chatbots," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 642-652.
    7. Ruth Beer & Anyan Qi & Ignacio Rios, 2026. "Behavioral Externalities of Process Automation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 575-593, January.
    8. Peng, Leiqing & Luo, Mengting & Guo, Yulang, 2023. "Deposit AI as the “invisible hand†to make the resale easier: A moderated mediation model," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    9. Felipe Caro & Anna Sáez de Tejada Cuenca, 2023. "Believing in Analytics: Managers’ Adherence to Price Recommendations from a DSS," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 524-542, March.
    10. Masoud Kamalahmadi & Qiuping Yu & Yong-Pin Zhou, 2021. "Call to Duty: Just-in-Time Scheduling in a Restaurant Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6751-6781, November.
    11. Chugunova, Marina & Sele, Daniela, 2022. "We and It: An interdisciplinary review of the experimental evidence on how humans interact with machines," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Diwas S. KC & Bradley R. Staats & Maryam Kouchaki & Francesca Gino, 2020. "Task Selection and Workload: A Focus on Completing Easy Tasks Hurts Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4397-4416, October.
    13. Ding, Zhenbin & Zhang, Yali & Sun, Jun & Goh, Mark & Yang, Zhaojun, 2025. "To reveal or conceal: AI identity disclosure strategies for merchants," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 283(C).
    14. Brice Corgnet, 2023. "The Algo Taming Effect: Mitigating Negative Reactions to Unfavorable Work Decisions," Working Papers 2302, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Etienne (GATE Lyon St-Etienne), Université de Lyon.
    15. Ting Hou & Meng Li & Yinliang (Ricky) Tan & Huazhong Zhao, 2024. "Physician Adoption of AI Assistant," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1639-1655, September.
    16. Li, Jian & Zhao, Jingdi & Huang, Jinsong, 2025. "Social avoidance needs boost AI's nonsocial attribute valuation in secret consumption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    17. Hermann, Erik & Puntoni, Stefano, 2024. "Artificial intelligence and consumer behavior: From predictive to generative AI," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    18. Erik Hermann, 2022. "Leveraging Artificial Intelligence in Marketing for Social Good—An Ethical Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 43-61, August.
    19. Tinglong Dai & Sridhar Tayur, 2022. "Designing AI‐augmented healthcare delivery systems for physician buy‐in and patient acceptance," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4443-4451, December.
    20. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:inm:ormsom:v:24:y:2022:i:6:p:3060-3078. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.