|
on Human Capital and Human Resource Management |
| By: | Robert D. Metcalfe; Alexandre B. Sollaci; Chad Syverson |
| Abstract: | Across many sectors, research has established that management explains a notable portion of productivity differences across organizations. A remaining question, however, is whether it is managers themselves or firm-wide management practices that matter. We shed light on this question by analyzing store-level data from two multibillion-dollar retail companies. In this setting, managers move between stores but management practices are set by firm policy and largely fixed, allowing us to hone in on managers’ personal roles in determining store performance. We find: (i) managers affect and explain a large share of the variance of store-level productivity; (ii) negative assortative matching between managers and stores, which may reflect both firms’ decisions and a selection-driven bias that we characterize and argue might apply in other settings using movers designs; (iii) managers who move do so on average from less productive to more productive stores; (iv) female managers are less likely to move stores than male managers; (v) manager quality is generally hard to explain with the observables in our data, but is correlated with the ratio of full-time to part-time workers; (vi) managers who obtain high labor productivity also tend to obtain high energy productivity, revealing some breadth in managers’ skills applicability; (vii) high-performing managers in stable growth times are also high-performing during turbulent times; and (viii) exogenous productivity shocks improve the quality of initially low quality managers, suggesting managers can learn. We explain implications of these findings for productivity research. |
| JEL: | D20 L2 M5 |
| Date: | 2023–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:31192&r=hrm |
| By: | Inga Laß (Federal Institute for Population Research (BiB), Wiesbaden, Germany); Esperanza Vera-Toscano (Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research, The University of Melbourne); Mark Wooden (Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research, The University of Melbourne) |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the impact of the growth in the incidence of working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic on workers’ job satisfaction. Using longitudinal data collected in 2019 and 2021 as part of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey, fixed-effects models of job satisfaction are estimated. Changes in the share of total weekly work hours usually worked from home are not found to have any significant association with changes in job satisfaction for men. In contrast, a strong significant positive (but non-linear) association is found for women, and this relationship is concentrated on women with children. These findings suggest the main benefit of working from home for workers arises from the improved ability to combine work and family responsibilities, something that matters more to women given they continue to shoulder most of the responsibility for house and care work. |
| Keywords: | working from home, job satisfaction, COVID-19 pandemic, HILDA Survey |
| JEL: | J22 J28 |
| Date: | 2023–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2023n04&r=hrm |
| By: | Paula Onuchic; Jo\~ao Ramos |
| Abstract: | We consider a team-production environment where all participants are motivated by career concerns, and where a team's joint productive outcome may have different reputational implications for different team members. In this context, we characterize equilibrium disclosure of team-outcomes when team-disclosure choices aggregate individual decisions through some deliberation protocol. In contrast with individual disclosure problems, we show that equilibria often involve partial disclosure. Furthermore, we study the effort-incentive properties of equilibrium disclosure strategies implied by different deliberation protocols; and show that the partial disclosure of team outcomes may improve individuals' incentives to contribute to the team. Finally, we study the design of deliberation protocols, and characterize productive environments where effort-incentives are maximized by unilateral decision protocols or more consensual deliberation procedures. |
| Date: | 2023–05 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2305.03633&r=hrm |