IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/a4d63.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When Will Workers Follow an Algorithm?: A Field Experiment with a Retail Business

Author

Listed:
  • Kawaguchi, Kohei

Abstract

This paper develops a new algorithm for increasing the revenue in a dynamic product assortment problem. Then, it identifies the challenges faced by managers in practice and discusses the conditions under which workers follow the algorithm. To do so, I conducted a field experiment with a beverage vending machine business. The experiment shows that, on average, workers are reluctant to follow the algorithmic advice; however, the workers are more willing to conform once their forecasts are integrated into the algorithm. Analyses using non-experimental variations highlight the importance of taking worker and context heterogeneity into account to maximize the benefit from adopting a new algorithm. Higher worker's regret, sales volatility, and fewer delegations increase the conformity, while they mitigate the effects of integration. Workers avoid high-traffic vending machines and focus on machines with high sales volatility when adopting the algorithm. The effects on the sales are largely similar to the effects on product assortments. The results emphasize the gap between nominal and actual performance of an algorithm and several practical issues to be resolved.

Suggested Citation

  • Kawaguchi, Kohei, 2019. "When Will Workers Follow an Algorithm?: A Field Experiment with a Retail Business," SocArXiv a4d63, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:a4d63
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/a4d63
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/630eac95a5bae3030bb6b022/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/a4d63?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. Coscelli, Andrea & Shum, Matthew, 2004. "An empirical model of learning and patient spillovers in new drug entry," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 213-246, October.
    2. Felipe Caro & Jérémie Gallien, 2007. "Dynamic Assortment with Demand Learning for Seasonal Consumer Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 276-292, February.
    3. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane & Baohong Sun, 2008. "A Dynamic Model of Brand Choice When Price and Advertising Signal Product Quality," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 1111-1125, 11-12.
    4. Chernew, Michael & Gowrisankaran, Gautam & Scanlon, Dennis P., 2008. "Learning and the value of information: Evidence from health plan report cards," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 156-174, May.
    5. Giora Harpaz & Wayne Y. Lee & Robert L. Winkler, 1982. "Learning, Experimentation, and the Optimal Output Decisions of a Competitive Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 589-603, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kohei Kawaguchi, 2021. "When Will Workers Follow an Algorithm? A Field Experiment with a Retail Business," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1670-1695, March.
    2. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Invited Paper ---Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges, and New Developments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 913-938, November.
    3. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges and New Developments," Economics Papers 2013-W07, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    4. Jie Bai, 2016. "Melons as Lemons: Asymmetric Information, Consumer Learning and Seller Reputation," Natural Field Experiments 00540, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. Balat, Jorge & Papageorge, Nicholas W. & Qayyum, Shaiza, 2017. "Positively Aware? Conflicting Expert Reviews and Demand for Medical Treatment," IZA Discussion Papers 10919, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Xu, Yan, 2017. "Essays on preference formation and home production," Other publications TiSEM b028fd7e-53ba-4ff6-97eb-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Matias Busso & Maria P. Gonzalez & Carlos Scartascini, 2022. "On the demand for telemedicine: Evidence from the COVID‐19 pandemic," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(7), pages 1491-1505, July.
    8. Hai Che & Tülin Erdem & T. Sabri Öncü, 2015. "Consumer learning and evolution of consumer brand preferences," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 173-202, September.
    9. Zhu, Z.;, 2023. "The Value of Patients: Heterogenous Physician Learning and Generic Drug Diffusion," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 23/12, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    10. Hai Che & Tülin Erdem & T. Öncü, 2015. "Consumer learning and evolution of consumer brand preferences," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 173-202, September.
    11. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    12. Navdeep Sahni, 2015. "Effect of temporal spacing between advertising exposures: Evidence from online field experiments," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 203-247, September.
    13. Maynou, L. & McGuire, A. & Serra-Sastre, V., 2019. "Exploring the Impact of New Medical Technology on Workforce Planning," Working Papers 19/07, Department of Economics, City University London.
    14. Santiago R. Balseiro & David B. Brown & Chen Chen, 2021. "Dynamic Pricing of Relocating Resources in Large Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4075-4094, July.
    15. Hoffman, Mitchell & Burks, Stephen V., 2017. "Worker Overconfidence: Field Evidence and Implications for Employee Turnover and Returns from Training," IZA Discussion Papers 10794, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.
    18. Zhang, Wei & Rajaram, Kumar, 2017. "Managing limited retail space for basic products: Space sharing vs. space dedication," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 768-781.
    19. Hostenkamp, Gisela, 2013. "Do follow-on therapeutic substitutes induce price competition between hospital medicines? Evidence from the Danish hospital sector," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 68-77.
    20. Dominik Oehlschläger & Andreas H. Glas & Michael Eßig, 2024. "How Digital Twins Impact Responsiveness: A Dynamic Fit Approach to Information Processing for High-Involvement Product Demand Management," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 661-706, December.

    More about this item

    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:osf:socarx:a4d63. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.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.