IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2406.11712.html

Incentive Contracts and Peer Effects in the Workplace

Author

Listed:
  • Marc Claveria-Mayol
  • Pau Mil'an
  • Nicol'as Oviedo-D'avila

Abstract

We analyze how firms should design wage contracts when workers collaborate in teams and effort costs depend on colleagues through a peer network. Performance-based compensation generates incentives that cascade through the organization, which firms target to boost profits. We analyze optimal incentive design if firms can -- and can't -- fully discriminate across workers, and when the production technology is separable or complementary across divisions. When workers' effort is substitutable, the most central workers -- those who influence most colleagues directly and indirectly -- receive the steepest incentives only when output risk is sufficiently large; otherwise firms prioritize workers who are closer to those they influence. When production technology exhibits complementarity across teams, stronger incentives are assigned to workers who influence colleagues in small teams that receive little influence from others. We derive a sufficient network statistic that measures the profit loss when firms must compensate workers of varying centrality equally. Finally, we apply our findings to organizational design questions, such as optimal firm structure and workforce investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc Claveria-Mayol & Pau Mil'an & Nicol'as Oviedo-D'avila, 2024. "Incentive Contracts and Peer Effects in the Workplace," Papers 2406.11712, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2406.11712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2406.11712
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xavier Gabaix & Augustin Landier, 2008. "Why has CEO Pay Increased So Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(1), pages 49-100.
    2. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2005. "Social Preferences and the Response to Incentives: Evidence from Personnel Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(3), pages 917-962.
    3. Maria Guadalupe & Julie Wulf, 2010. "The Flattening Firm and Product Market Competition: The Effect of Trade Liberalization on Corporate Hierarchies," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 105-127, October.
    4. David Card & Alexandre Mas & Enrico Moretti & Emmanuel Saez, 2012. "Inequality at Work: The Effect of Peer Salaries on Job Satisfaction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2981-3003, October.
    5. Smeets, Valerie & Warzynski, Frederic, 2008. "Too many theories, too few facts? What the data tell us about the link between span of control, compensation and career dynamics," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 687-703, August.
    6. Zoë Cullen, 2024. "Is Pay Transparency Good?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 153-180, Winter.
    7. Tomasz Obloj & Todd Zenger, 2022. "The influence of pay transparency on (gender) inequity, inequality and the performance basis of pay," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(5), pages 646-655, May.
    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. Joseph Root & Evan Sadler, 2026. "A Theory of Network Games Part 1: Utility Representations," Papers 2602.16071, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2026.

    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. Duka, Zoga & Weber, Bryan S., 2025. "The effect of mandatory salary revelations on job postings," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    2. Colin P. Green & John S. Heywood & Nikolaos Theodoropoulos, 2021. "Hierarchy and the Employer Size Effect on Wages: Evidence from Britain," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(351), pages 671-696, July.
    3. Maida, Agata & Pezone, Vincenzo, 2024. "CEO Pay Disclosure and Within-Firm Wage Inequality," IZA Discussion Papers 17243, IZA Network @ LISER.
    4. Pedro Carneiro & Yyannu Cruz-Aguayo & Francesca Salvati & Norbert Schady, 2025. "The Effect of Classroom Rank on Learning throughout Elementary School: Experimental Evidence from Ecuador," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(2), pages 433-466.
    5. Bennedsen, Morten & Larsen, Birthe & Wei, Jiayi, 2022. "Wage Transparency and the Gender Pay Gap: A Survey," Working Papers 17-2022, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    6. McCann, Robert J. & Shi, Xianwen & Siow, Aloysius & Wolthoff, Ronald P., 2012. "Becker Meets Ricardo: Multisector Matching with Social and Cognitive Skills," IZA Discussion Papers 6533, IZA Network @ LISER.
    7. Antonio Cabrales & Wenhao Cheng, 2026. "Evaluation and Assignment with Networked Competition and Spillovers," CESifo Working Paper Series 12816, CESifo.
    8. Emilie R. Feldman & Claudine Gartenberg & Julie Wulf, 2018. "Pay inequality and corporate divestitures," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(11), pages 2829-2858, November.
    9. Valerie Smeets & Michael Waldman & Frederic Warzynski, 2019. "Performance, Career Dynamics, and Span of Control," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(4), pages 1183-1213.
    10. Subhasish Dugar & Kenju Kamei, 2025. "Pay Inequity and Peer Dynamics: New Field Evidence on Labor Market Sorting," Keio-IES Discussion Paper Series DP2025-020, Institute for Economics Studies, Keio University.
    11. Philip Babcock & Kelly Bedard & Gary Charness & John Hartman & Heather Royer, 2015. "Letting Down The Team? Social Effects Of Team Incentives," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 13(5), pages 841-870, October.
    12. Amior, Michael & San, Shmuel, 2026. "Internal Pay Equity and the Quantity-Quality Trade-Off in Hiring," CEPR Discussion Papers 21191, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    13. Jeremy T. Fox, 2009. "Firm-Size Wage Gaps, Job Responsibility, and Hierarchical Matching," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(1), pages 83-126, January.
    14. Fan, C. Simon & Wei, Xiangdong & Wu, Jia & Zhang, Junsen, 2022. "Observability and peer effects: Theory and evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 847-867.
    15. Josse Delfgaauw & Robert Dur & Oke Onemu & Joeri Sol, 2022. "Team Incentives, Social Cohesion, and Performance: A Natural Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 230-256, January.
    16. Schymik, Jan Simon, 2015. "Trade, Technologies, and the Evolution of Corporate Governance," Discussion Papers in Economics 24871, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    17. Zhou, Jun, 2012. "Cartel Duration and Endogenous Private Monitoring and Communication: An Instrumental Variables Approach," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 369, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    18. Luis Garicano & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2015. "Knowledge-Based Hierarchies: Using Organizations to Understand the Economy," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 1-30, August.
    19. Semih Tumen, 2016. "A theory of intra-firm group design," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 89-102, February.
    20. Friebel, Guido & Raith, Michael, 2016. "Managers, Training, and Internal Labor Markets," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145666, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation
    • D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2406.11712. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.