IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umaror/2019006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mission of the company, prosocial attitudes and job preferences: A discrete choice experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Non, Arjan

    (Macro, International & Labour Economics, RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research)

  • Rohde, Ingrid
  • de Grip, Andries

    (RS: GSBE Theme Learning and Work, RS: SBE - MACIMIDE, Research Centre for Educ and Labour Mark)

  • Dohmen, Thomas

    (RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research, Macro, International & Labour Economics)

Abstract

We conduct a discrete choice experiment to investigate how the mission of high-tech companies affects job attractiveness and induces self-selection of science and engineering graduates with respect to their prosocial attitudes. We characterize mission by whether or not the company combines its profit motive with a mission on innovation or corporate social responsibility (CSR). Furthermore, we vary job design (e.g. autonomy) and contractible job attributes (e.g. job security). We find that companies with a mission on innovation or CSR are considered more attractive. Women and individuals who are more altruistic and less competitive feel particularly attracted to such companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Non, Arjan & Rohde, Ingrid & de Grip, Andries & Dohmen, Thomas, 2019. "Mission of the company, prosocial attitudes and job preferences: A discrete choice experiment," ROA Research Memorandum 006, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:umaror:2019006
    DOI: 10.26481/umaror.2019006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/35254205/ROA_RM_2019_6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fehrler, Sebastian & Kosfeld, Michael, 2014. "Pro-social missions and worker motivation: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 99-110.
    2. Gregg, Paul & Grout, Paul A. & Ratcliffe, Anita & Smith, Sarah & Windmeijer, Frank, 2011. "How important is pro-social behaviour in the delivery of public services?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7-8), pages 758-766, August.
    3. Robert Dur & Robin Zoutenbier, 2015. "Intrinsic Motivations of Public Sector Employees: Evidence for Germany," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 16(3), pages 343-366, August.
    4. Dan Ariely & Anat Bracha & Stephan Meier, 2009. "Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 544-555, March.
    5. Lea Cassar & Stephan Meier, 2018. "Nonmonetary Incentives and the Implications of Work as a Source of Meaning," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 215-238, Summer.
    6. Ernesto Dal Bó & Frederico Finan & Martín A. Rossi, 2013. "Strengthening State Capabilities: The Role of Financial Incentives in the Call to Public Service," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 128(3), pages 1169-1218.
    7. Layton, David F., 2000. "Random Coefficient Models for Stated Preference Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 21-36, July.
    8. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth, 2017. "Correlation and scale in mixed logit models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-8.
    9. Ernesto Reuben & Paola Sapienza & Luigi Zingales, 2015. "Taste for Competition and the Gender Gap Among Young Business Professionals," NBER Working Papers 21695, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    11. Tor Eriksson & Nicolai Kristensen, 2014. "Wages or Fringes? Some Evidence on Trade-Offs and Sorting," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(4), pages 899-928.
    12. Banuri, Sheheryar & Keefer, Philip, 2016. "Pro-social motivation, effort and the call to public service," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 139-164.
    13. Kevin M. Murphy & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1991. "The Allocation of Talent: Implications for Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 503-530.
    14. Jacobsen, Karin J. & Eika, Kari H. & Helland, Leif & Lind, Jo Thori & Nyborg, Karine, 2011. "Are nurses more altruistic than real estate brokers?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 818-831.
    15. Matthew Wiswall & Basit Zafar, 2018. "Preference for the Workplace, Investment in Human Capital, and Gender," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 133(1), pages 457-507.
    16. Tonin, Mirco & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2010. "Disentangling the sources of pro-socially motivated effort: A field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 1086-1092, December.
    17. Ernesto Reuben & Matthew Wiswall & Basit Zafar, 2017. "Preferences and Biases in Educational Choices and Labour Market Expectations: Shrinking the Black Box of Gender," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(604), pages 2153-2186, September.
    18. Buurman, Margaretha & Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert & Van den Bossche, Seth, 2012. "Public sector employees: Risk averse and altruistic?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 279-291.
    19. Reuben, Ernesto & Sapienza, Paola & Zingales, Luigi, 2015. "Competitiveness and the gender gap among young business professionals," CEPR Discussion Papers 10924, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2015. "Corporate Philanthropy and Productivity: Evidence from an Online Real Effort Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1795-1811, August.
    21. Caroline Flammer, 2015. "Does Corporate Social Responsibility Lead to Superior Financial Performance? A Regression Discontinuity Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2549-2568, November.
    22. Emily Lancsar & Denzil G. Fiebig & Arne Risa Hole, 2017. "Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 697-716, July.
    23. Falk, Armin & Becker, Anke & Dohmen, Thomas & Huffman, David B. & Sunde, Uwe, 2016. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 9674, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    24. Ashraf, Nava & Bandiera, Oriana & Jack, B. Kelsey, 2014. "No margin, no mission? A field experiment on incentives for public service delivery," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-17.
    25. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    26. Christiane Bode & Jasjit Singh & Michelle Rogan, 2015. "Corporate Social Initiatives and Employee Retention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1702-1720, December.
    27. Timothy Besley & Maitreesh Ghatak, 2017. "Profit with Purpose? A Theory of Social Enterprise," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 19-58, August.
    28. Lea Cassar, 2014. "Job mission as a substitute for monetary incentives: experimental evidence," ECON - Working Papers 177, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    29. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    30. Vanessa C. Burbano, 2016. "Social Responsibility Messages and Worker Wage Requirements: Field Experimental Evidence from Online Labor Marketplaces," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 1010-1028, August.
    31. Jeffrey Carpenter & Erick Gong, 2016. "Motivating Agents: How Much Does the Mission Matter?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(1), pages 211-236.
    32. Gerhards, Leonie, 2015. "The incentive effects of missions—Evidence from experiments with NGO employees and students," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 252-262.
    33. Rema Hanna & Shing-Yi Wang, 2017. "Dishonesty and Selection into Public Service: Evidence from India," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 262-290, August.
    34. Imas, Alex, 2014. "Working for the “warm glow”: On the benefits and limits of prosocial incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 14-18.
    35. Denise Doiron & Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Deborah J. Street, 2014. "Job preferences of students and new graduates in nursing," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(9), pages 924-939, March.
    36. Lena Evertz & Stefan Süß, 2017. "The importance of individual differences for applicant attraction: a literature review and avenues for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 141-174, 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. Jeworrek, Sabrina & Mertins, Vanessa, 2019. "Mission, motivation, and the active decision to work for a social cause," IWH Discussion Papers 10/2019, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    2. Dur, Robert & van Lent, Max, 2018. "Serving the public interest in several ways: Theory and empirics," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 13-24.
    3. Florian H. Schneider & Fanny Brun & Roberto A. Weber, 2020. "Sorting and wage premiums in immoral work," ECON - Working Papers 353, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    4. Florian H. Schneider & Fanny Brun & Roberto A. Weber, 2020. "Sorting and Wage Premiums in Immoral Work," CESifo Working Paper Series 8456, CESifo.
    5. Banuri, Sheheryar & Keefer, Philip, 2016. "Pro-social motivation, effort and the call to public service," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 139-164.
    6. Koppel, Hannes & Regner, Tobias, 2019. "What drives motivated agents: The ‘right’ mission or sharing it with the principal?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    7. Daniel Jones & Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2018. "Paying for what kind of Performance? Performance Pay and Multitasking in Mission-Oriented Jobs," CESifo Working Paper Series 7156, CESifo.
    8. Heinz, Matthias & Schumacher, Heiner, 2017. "Signaling cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 199-216.
    9. Barigozzi, Francesca & Burani, Nadia, 2019. "Competition for talent when firms' mission matters," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 128-151.
    10. Kajackaite, Agne & Sliwka, Dirk, 2020. "Prosocial managers, employee motivation, and the creation of shareholder value," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 217-235.
    11. Sheheryar Banuri & Philip Keefer & Damien de Walque, 2017. "Love the job... or the patient? Task vs. mission-based motiviations in healthcare," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 17-09, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    12. Briscese, Guglielmo & Feltovich, Nick & Slonim, Robert, 2021. "Who Benefits from Corporate Social Responsibility? Reciprocity in the Presence of Social Incentives and Self-Selection," IZA Discussion Papers 14067, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Reggiani, Tommaso G. & Rilke, Rainer Michael, 2020. "When Too Good Is Too Much: Social Incentives and Job Selection," IZA Discussion Papers 12905, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Jesper Armouti-Hansen & Lea Cassar & Anna Deréky, 2020. "Efficiency Wages with Motivated Agents," CESifo Working Paper Series 8474, CESifo.
    15. Charness, Gary & Cobo-Reyes, Ramón & Sánchez, Ángela, 2016. "The effect of charitable giving on workers’ performance: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 61-74.
    16. Sheheryar Banuri & Philip Keefer, 2016. "Mellowing with Tenure? Socialization Increases Prosocial Behavior in Public Organizations," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Sebastian J. Goerg & John R. Hamman (ed.), Experiments in Organizational Economics, volume 19, pages 127-140, Emerald Publishing Ltd.
    17. Jasjit Singh & Nina Teng & Serguei Netessine, 2019. "Philanthropic Campaigns and Customer Behavior: Field Experiments on an Online Taxi Booking Platform," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 913-932, February.
    18. Kampkötter, Patrick & Petters, Lea & Sliwka, Dirk, 2020. "Employee Identification and Wages: On the Economics of "Affective Commitment"," IZA Discussion Papers 13624, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2015. "Corporate Philanthropy and Productivity: Evidence from an Online Real Effort Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1795-1811, August.
    20. Hiller, Victor & Raffin, Natacha, 2020. "Firms’ social responsibility and workers’ motivation at the industry equilibrium," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 131-149.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J81 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Working Conditions
    • J82 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Labor Force Composition
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects

    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:unm:umaror:2019006. 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: (Leonne Portz). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/romaanl.html .

    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 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.

    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.