Should Human Capital Development Programs be Mandatory or Voluntary? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Mentorship

In a field experiment, we find that a mandatory mentorship program raises worker productivity, whereas a voluntary version of the program does not. A significant reason why the mandatory program results in larger gains is that the lowest-productivity employees do not participate when the program is voluntary despite their having the greatest treatment benefits. A nationally representative survey of U.S. workers shows wide variation in human capital development program participation, suggesting that understanding self-selection is important for firms’ returns on these programs across a variety of settings. Our findings have implications for resource allocation, experimental design, productivity dispersion, and inequality. This paper was accepted by Maria Guadalupe, business strategy. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.07524 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Management Science
Published
2025-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.07524
Primary Topic
Higher Education Research Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Should Human Capital Development Programs be Mandatory or Voluntary? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Mentorship

Nathan Seegert, Jason Sandvik, Christopher Stanton, Richard E. Saouma
Management Science
Higher Education Research Studies
article

Should Human Capital Development Programs be Mandatory or Voluntary? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Mentorship

Nathan Seegert, Jason Sandvik, Christopher Stanton, Richard E. Saouma
article en

Abstract

In a field experiment, we find that a mandatory mentorship program raises worker productivity, whereas a voluntary version of the program does not. A significant reason why the mandatory program results in larger gains is that the lowest-productivity employees do not participate when the program is voluntary despite their having the greatest treatment benefits. A nationally representative survey of U.S. workers shows wide variation in human capital development program participation, suggesting that understanding self-selection is important for firms’ returns on these programs across a variety of settings. Our findings have implications for resource allocation, experimental design, productivity dispersion, and inequality. This paper was accepted by Maria Guadalupe, business strategy. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.07524 .

Management Science
Center for Economic and Policy Research (US), Northeastern University (US), University of Arizona (US), Michigan State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Higher Education Research Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Should Human Capital Development Programs be Mandatory or Voluntary? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Mentorship — Nathan Seegert, Jason Sandvik, et al. · Management Science (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS