IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

An experimental test of behavior under team production


  • Donald Vandegrift
  • Abdullah Yavas


This study reports experiments that examine behavior under team production and a piece rate. In the experiments, participants complete a forecasting task and are rewarded based on the accuracy of their forecasts. In the piece-rate condition, participants are paid based on their own performance, whereas the team‐production condition rewards participants based on the average performance of the team. Overall, there is no statistically significant difference in performance between the conditions. However, this result masks important differences in the behavior of men and women across the conditions. Men in the team‐production condition increase their performance relative to men in the piece‐rate condition. However, this gap in male performances across conditions diminishes over the course of the experiment. In contrast, women in the team‐production condition show significantly lower performance than the women in the piece rate. As a consequence of these differences, men in the team‐production condition show significantly better performance than women in the team‐production condition. We also find evidence that men show stronger performance when they are in teams with a larger variation in skill level. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald Vandegrift & Abdullah Yavas, 2011. "An experimental test of behavior under team production," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 35-51, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:32:y:2011:i:1:p:35-51

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Philippe Aghion & Patrick Bolton & Christopher Harris & Bruno Jullien, 1991. "Optimal Learning by Experimentation," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(4), pages 621-654.
    2. Loginova, Oksana & Taylor, Curtis, 2003. "Price Experimentation with Strategic Buyers," Working Papers 03-02, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    3. Oksana Loginova & Curtis Taylor, 2008. "Price experimentation with strategic buyers," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 12(3), pages 165-187, September.
    4. Rothschild, Michael, 1974. "A two-armed bandit theory of market pricing," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 185-202, October.
    5. Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1986. "Classical estimation methods for LDV models using simulation," Handbook of Econometrics,in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 40, pages 2383-2441 Elsevier.
    6. Esteves, Rosa-Branca, 2010. "Pricing with customer recognition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 669-681, November.
    7. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    8. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1995. "Asymptotic Bias in Simulated Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Discrete Choice Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(03), pages 437-483, June.
    9. Alessandro Acquisti & Hal R. Varian, 2005. "Conditioning Prices on Purchase History," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 367-381, May.
    10. Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain, 1993. "Simulation-based inference : A survey with special reference to panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1-2), pages 5-33, September.
    11. Brian Kahin & Hal R. Varian (ed.), 2000. "Internet Publishing and Beyond: The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262611597, January.
    12. Carlos Arias & THOMAS L. COX, 1999. "Maximum Simulated Likelihood: A Brief Introduction for Practitioners," Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Staff Papers 421, Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Department.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Vanessa Mertins & Wolfgang Hoffeld, 2013. "Do Overconfident Workers Cooperate Less? The Relationship between Overconfidence and Cooperation in Team Production," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201313, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    2. Kräkel, Matthias & Nieken, Petra, 2015. "Relative performance pay in the shadow of crisis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 244-268.
    3. William Gilje Gjedrem & Ola Kvaløy, 2018. "Relative Performance Feedback to Teams," CESifo Working Paper Series 6871, CESifo Group Munich.
    4. Chao, Hong & Croson, Rachel T.A., 2013. "An experimental comparison of incentive contracts in partnerships," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 78-87.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:wly:mgtdec:v:32:y:2011:i:1:p:35-51. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.