IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crr/crrwps/wp2010-5.html

Incorporating Employee Heterogeneity Into Default Rules for Retirement Plan Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Gopi Shah Goda
  • Colleen Flaherty Manchester

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of incorporating individual-level heterogeneity into default rules for retirement plan selection. We use data from a large employer that transitioned from a defined benefit (DB) plan to a defined contribution (DC) plan, offering existing employees a choice of plans. Employees who did not make a choice were defaulted to switch to the DC plan if under age 45 or remain in the DB plan if age 45 or older. Using a regression discontinuity framework, we estimate that the default increased the probability of enrolling in one plan over the other by 60 percentage points. We develop a framework to solve for the optimal age-based default rule analytically and use our results to empirically evaluate the optimal age-based default rule for the firm in our setting. We show that for a broad range of levels of risk aversion, conditioning the default for the choice between pension plans on age can substantially improve outcomes relative to a uniform default policy. Our results suggest that considerable welfare gains are possible by varying defaults by observable characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Gopi Shah Goda & Colleen Flaherty Manchester, 2010. "Incorporating Employee Heterogeneity Into Default Rules for Retirement Plan Selection," Working Papers, Center for Retirement Research at Boston College wp2010-5, Center for Retirement Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:crr:crrwps:wp2010-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crr.bc.edu/working-papers/incorporating-employee-heterogeneity-into-default-rules-for-retirement-plan-selection/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gopi Shah Goda & Colleen Flaherty Manchester & Aaron Sojourner, 2012. "What Will My Account Really Be Worth? An Experiment on Exponential Growth Bias and Retirement Saving," NBER Working Papers 17927, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Goda, Gopi Shah & Levy, Matthew R. & Manchester, Colleen Flaherty & Sojourner, Aaron & Tasoff, Joshua, 2020. "Who is a passive saver under opt-in and auto-enrollment?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 301-321.
    3. Joshua Blumenstock & Michael Callen & Tarek Ghani, 2018. "Why Do Defaults Affect Behavior? Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(10), pages 2868-2901, October.
    4. Cardella, Eric & Kalenkoski, Charlene M. & Parent, Michael, 2018. "Less Is Not More: Information Presentation Complexity and 401(k) Planning Choices," IZA Discussion Papers 11538, IZA Network @ LISER.
    5. Ericson, Keith M. Marzilli, 2020. "When consumers do not make an active decision: Dynamic default rules and their equilibrium effects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 369-385.
    6. Dean Karlan & Aishwarya Lakshmi Ratan & Jonathan Zinman, 2014. "Savings by and for the Poor: A Research Review and Agenda," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 36-78, March.
    7. Jennifer Alonso Garcia & Hazel Bateman & Johan Bonekamp & Ralph Stevens, 2017. "Retirement drawdown defaults: the role of implied endorsement," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/300025, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Bernal, Noelia & Olivera, Javier, 2020. "Choice of pension management fees and effects on pension wealth," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 539-568.
    9. Ngoc Dao, 2024. "Does a requirement to offer retirement plans help low‐income workers save for retirement? Early evidence from the OregonSaves program," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(3), pages 524-543, July.
    10. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2011. "Behavioral economics perspectives on public sector pension plans," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 315-336, April.
    11. Brown, Jeffrey R. & Farrell, Anne M. & Weisbenner, Scott J., 2016. "Decision-making approaches and the propensity to default: Evidence and implications," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 477-495.
    12. Gopi Shah Goda & Damon Jones & Colleen Flaherty Manchester, 2013. "Retirement Plan Type and Employee Mobility: The Role of Selection and Incentive Effects," NBER Working Papers 18902, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Timothy F. Harris & Aaron Yelowitz, 2017. "Nudging Life Insurance Holdings In The Workplace," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 951-981, April.
    14. Matthew M. Chingos & Martin R. West, 2015. "Which Teachers Choose a Defined Contribution Pension Plan? Evidence from the Florida Retirement System," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 10(2), pages 193-222, March.
    15. Colleen Flaherty Manchester, 2019. "Retirement plan type and worker mobility," World of Labour, LISER, pages 461-461, October.
    16. Prast, Henriette & Bodie, Z., 2011. "Rational Pensions for Irrational People : Behavioral Science Lessons for the Netherlands," Other publications TiSEM 52f74d03-aec6-4cb1-97c1-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Georg Weizsäcker & Martin G. Kocher & Felix Gelhaar & Simon Bartke, 2015. "Vielfalt in der ökonomischen Wissenschaft: Verhaltensökonomische Ansätze in der Diskussion," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 68(24), pages 03-12, December.
    18. Constantin Anghelache & Alexandru MANOLE & Marius POPOVICI & Emilia STANCIU, 2016. "Statistical analysis of the pensioners condition," Romanian Statistical Review Supplement, Romanian Statistical Review, vol. 64(12), pages 180-186, December.
    19. Itzik Fadlon & Jessica Laird & Torben Heien Nielsen, 2016. "Do Employer Pension Contributions Reflect Employee Preferences? Evidence from a Retirement Savings Reform in Denmark," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 196-216, July.
    20. Julie Agnew & Joshua Hurwitz, 2013. "Financial Education and Choice in State Public Pension Systems," NBER Working Papers 18907, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Jonathan Cribb & Carl Emmerson, 2016. "What happens when employers are obliged to nudge? Automatic enrolment and pension saving in the UK," IFS Working Papers W16/19, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    22. Blake, David & Duffield, Mel & Tonks, Ian & Haig, Alistair & Blower, Dean & MacPhee, Laura, 2022. "Smart defaults: Determining the number of default funds in a pension scheme," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(4).
    23. Timmons, Shane & McGowan, Féidhlim P. & Lunn, Peter D., 2019. "Setting defaults for online banking transactions: Experimental evidence from personal loan repayment terms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 161-165.
    24. Goda, Gopi Shah & Manchester, Colleen Flaherty & Sojourner, Aaron J., 2014. "What will my account really be worth? Experimental evidence on how retirement income projections affect saving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 80-92.
    25. Koo, Bonsoo & Pantelous, Athanasios A. & Wang, Yunxiao, 2022. "Novel utility-based life cycle models to optimise income in retirement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(1), pages 346-361.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H8 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues
    • J26 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Retirement; Retirement Policies

    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:crr:crrwps:wp2010-5. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Amy Grzybowski or Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crrbcus.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.