Incentive and Signaling Effects of Bonus Payments: An Experiment in a Company

ABSTRACT Economists and management scholars have argued that the scope of incentives to increase cooperation in organizations is limited as their use may signal the prevalence of free‐riding among employees. This paper tests this hypothesis with an artefactual field experiment that assigns managers and employees from a large company to stylized roles within a controlled game. We exogenously vary whether managers are informed about prevailing cooperation levels among employees before they can set incentives to promote cooperation. In addition, employees matched to informed managers learn that the manager could base their incentive choice on cooperation levels. We find no evidence for the hypothesized signaling effect. Having an informed manager set the incentive does not change employees' beliefs about the cooperativeness of others. Incentives, hence, have strong positive effects on cooperative beliefs, irrespective of information. The absence of the signaling effect appears to reflect employees' perceptions of managerial intentions: incentives are interpreted not as signals of low cooperation, but as rewards for expected cooperation. A follow‐up survey experiment supports this mechanism, showing that a cooperative culture affects the interpretation of managerial actions.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
Published
2026-03-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.70028
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Incentive and Signaling Effects of Bonus Payments: An Experiment in a Company

Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

Incentive and Signaling Effects of Bonus Payments: An Experiment in a Company

article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Economists and management scholars have argued that the scope of incentives to increase cooperation in organizations is limited as their use may signal the prevalence of free‐riding among employees. This paper tests this hypothesis with an artefactual field experiment that assigns managers and employees from a large company to stylized roles within a controlled game. We exogenously vary whether managers are informed about prevailing cooperation levels among employees before they can set incentives to promote cooperation. In addition, employees matched to informed managers learn that the manager could base their incentive choice on cooperation levels. We find no evidence for the hypothesized signaling effect. Having an informed manager set the incentive does not change employees' beliefs about the cooperativeness of others. Incentives, hence, have strong positive effects on cooperative beliefs, irrespective of information. The absence of the signaling effect appears to reflect employees' perceptions of managerial intentions: incentives are interpreted not as signals of low cooperation, but as rewards for expected cooperation. A follow‐up survey experiment supports this mechanism, showing that a cooperative culture affects the interpretation of managerial actions.

Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
University of Essex (GB), Bundesverband Glaukom-Selbsthilfe (DE), Bundesverband Flachglas (DE), RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Experimental Behavioral Economics 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.