IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp9386.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Procedures vs. Incentives: The Case of the University Promotion System in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • dal Maso, Carlo

    (IMT Lucca)

  • Rettore, Enrico

    (University of Padova)

  • Rocco, Lorenzo

    (University of Padova)

Abstract

A common observation is that individuals strive to neutralize the effect of procedural rules designed to drive choices away from their private optimum. An example of this phenomenon is offered by the reaction of Italian academia to two reforms that modified the procedures of recruitment and promotion, by introducing random selection of the examiners not appointed by the recruiting school and reducing from two to one the number of candidates to be qualified. We model the negotiation occurring within evaluation committees and test the decision rule implied by the theoretical model on the sample composed of all selections to associate and full professorship initiated by the Italian schools of economics between 2004 and 2011. Particularly, we investigate whether these reforms decreased the relative weight of the examiner appointed by the recruiting school on committee's decision. Empirical results suggest that both reforms had little if no effect on examiners' weights.

Suggested Citation

  • dal Maso, Carlo & Rettore, Enrico & Rocco, Lorenzo, 2015. "Procedures vs. Incentives: The Case of the University Promotion System in Italy," IZA Discussion Papers 9386, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp9386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp9386.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria De Paola & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Gender Discrimination and Evaluators’ Gender: Evidence from Italian Academia," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82(325), pages 162-188, January.
    2. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Linnemer, Laurent & Visser, Michael, 2008. "Publish or peer-rich? The role of skills and networks in hiring economics professors," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 423-441, June.
    3. Perotti, Roberto & Labartino, Giovanna, 2011. "Academic Dynasties: Decentralization and Familism in the Italian Academia," CEPR Discussion Papers 8645, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Natalia Zinovyeva & Manuel F. Bagues, 2010. "Does gender matter for academic promotion? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment," Working Papers 2010-15, FEDEA.
    5. Pierre-Philippe Combes & Laurent Linnemer & Michael Visser, 2008. "Publish or Peer-rich," Post-Print hal-00558189, HAL.
    6. Manuel F. Bagues & Berta Esteve-Volart, 2010. "Can Gender Parity Break the Glass Ceiling? Evidence from a Repeated Randomized Experiment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(4), pages 1301-1328.
    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. Maria De Paola & Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2017. "Gender differences in the propensity to apply for promotion: evidence from the Italian Scientific Qualification," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 986-1009.

    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. Natalia Zinovyeva & Manuel Bagues, 2015. "The Role of Connections in Academic Promotions," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 264-292, April.
    2. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2019. "Gender gaps in the evaluation of research: evidence from submissions to economics conferences (Updated March 2020)," Working Papers 1918, Banco de España, revised Mar 2020.
    3. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2021. "Gender Gaps in the Evaluation of Research: Evidence from Submissions to Economics Conferences," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(3), pages 590-618, June.
    4. Pierre Deschamps, 2018. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: a Boon or a Bane for Women?," Sciences Po publications 82, Sciences Po.
    5. Maria De Paola & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Gender Discrimination and Evaluators’ Gender: Evidence from Italian Academia," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82(325), pages 162-188, January.
    6. Pierre Deschamps, 2018. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: a Boon or a Bane for Women?," Post-Print hal-03393117, HAL.
    7. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2014. "Do gender quotas pass the test ? Evidence from academic evaluations in Italy," LEM Papers Series 2014/14, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7bucmgmilh9ul9ogmiku5legh5 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Clément Bosquet & Pierre‐Philippe Combes & Cecilia García‐Peñalosa, 2019. "Gender and Promotions: Evidence from Academic Economists in France," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 1020-1053, July.
    10. Bosquet, Clément & Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Garcia-Penalosa, Cecilia, 2013. "Gender and competition: evidence from academic promotions in France," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58350, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Paul Heidhues & Botond KH{o}szegi & Philipp Strack, 2019. "Overconfidence and Prejudice," Papers 1909.08497, arXiv.org.
    12. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    13. D. Checchi & S. Cicognani & N. Kulic, 2015. "Gender quotas or girls networks? Towards an understanding of recruitment in the research profession in Italy," Working Papers wp1047, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5cma2v9f098fu956p3fcsgt7d1 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Nathalie Greenan & Joseph Lanfranchi & Yannick L'Horty & Mathieu Narcy & Guillaume Pierne, 2019. "L'analyse des données de concours au regard des discriminations à l'entrée dans la Fonction Publique d’État," Working Papers halshs-02149277, HAL.
    16. Thomas Breda & Son Thierry Ly, 2012. "Do Professors Really Perpetuate the Gender Gap in Science? Evidence from a Natural Experiment in a French Higher Education Institution," CEE Discussion Papers 0138, Centre for the Economics of Education, LSE.
    17. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1mv0mm6vqb8dibn34slm9vhu6d is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Francesco Rosati, 2016. "Gender bias in academic recruitment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 119-141, January.
    19. Natalia Zinovyeva & Manuel F. Bagues, 2010. "Does gender matter for academic promotion? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment," Working Papers 2010-15, FEDEA.
    20. Clément Bosquet & Pierre‐Philippe Combes & Cecilia García‐Peñalosa, 2019. "Gender and Promotions: Evidence from Academic Economists in France," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 1020-1053, July.
    21. Marcella Corsi & Giulia Zacchia, 2014. "Women Economists in Italy: A Bibliometric Analysis of their Scientific Production in the Past Decade," Working Papers CEB 14-008, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    22. Pierre Deschamps, 2018. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: a Boon or a Bane for Women?," SciencePo Working papers hal-03393117, HAL.
    23. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/37ufknmfv39tppkbjb4dmidnqe is not listed on IDEAS
    24. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/26s2fhqla9901btt78qnrel14d is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Eren, Ozkan & Mocan, Naci, 2020. "Judge Peer Effects in the Courthouse," IZA Discussion Papers 13937, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    negotiation; incentives; university recruitment; formal procedures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • M51 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Firm Employment Decisions; Promotions
    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education

    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:iza:izadps:dp9386. 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: Holger Hinte (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.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.