Performance-Feedback
Co-authored with Jean-Pierre Benoît and Ernesto Reuben
Feedback is important for the improvement of performance. We conduct an online experiment to study the nature of qualitative feedback and its effectiveness. Despite the prevalence of qualitative feedback, the prior experimental economics literature has focused almost exclusively on quantitative feedback. We examine how qualitative feedback informs beliefs and decision-making, and whether there are gender differences. In contrast to earlier work, we study the entire performance-feedback sequence: from task performance to beliefs about the performance, to external evaluation, to feedback, and finally to updated beliefs and actions. We run a panel study where writers complete an essay task, which is graded by evaluators who also provide written feedback on the task performance. Using sentiment analysis, we find that feedback is more positive when evaluators know that writers will see it. Nonetheless, it is still interpreted appropriately. There are no gender differences in the feedback given or how it is interpreted. However, prior to feedback women underestimate their performance relative to men. This suggests that, in order to correct for this prior difference, feedback should be gender specific. In one treatment, writers face a choice to compete; in another, a choice to edit. There are two channels through which feedback impacts the choice to compete: a belief channel and an encouragement channel. Women respond equally to both channels, whereas men are less responsive to the encouragement channel. Feedback is more useful when it is more concrete.
Optimal Organizational Structure
Competition for Informal and Formal Hiring
An economic perspective on diversity within organizations
Working Paper
NYUAD Division of Social Science Working Paper, #0109, 2025
In G. Grote, A. Guzzo, R. Lavive, and H. Nalbantian. (eds.) Interdisciplinary Foundations for Organizational Science and Application: A Dialogue between Psychology and Economics. Oxford University Press. (in press)
Co-authored with Ernesto Reuben
This paper summarizes the theoretical and empirical research in economics on the impact of employee diversity on organizational performance, where diversity is predominantly viewed through the lens of gender and ethnicity/nationality. The literature has studied this topic through two types of interactions: horizontal interactions between workers who are peers and vertical interactions between managers and workers. The theory of horizontal interactions highlights the conditions under which diversity is beneficial, such as when different groups bring complementary knowledge, but also when it is costly, as in the case of intergroup communication frictions. The theory of vertical interactions focuses on discrimination against different social groups due to the hierarchical nature of these interactions. Discrimination can result from preferences that favor or disfavor certain groups, or from imperfect information and the use of beliefs about group productivity to infer individual productivity. For both horizontal and vertical interactions, the empirical findings on the impact of diversity are mixed, with varying effects on organizational performance, ranging from positive to negative to no impact. Although this may suggest the field has little to say on the subject, the impact of diversity is often in line with the theoretical predictions. This suggests that for organizations to reap the potential rewards from diversity, they must consider how their context relates to the theory and act accordingly.