2012•Economic InquiryOpen access

PAY SECRECY AND EFFORT PROVISION

Daniele Nosenzo

Open full text 37 citations

Abstract

Pay secrecy is often justified on the ground of concerns about the detrimental consequences of intra‐firm pay comparisons for work morale and performance. Surprisingly, however, there is only limited empirical evidence that the availability of pay comparison information is detrimental for effort provision. In this paper, I study pay comparison effects in a gift‐exchange game laboratory experiment where an employer is matched with two symmetric employees. I compare effort choices made by employees in a “pay secrecy” treatment and in two “public wages” treatments where employees are informed of the wage paid to the co‐worker. In one “public wages” treatment the employer can choose both wages she pays to the employees, while in the other treatment the wage paid to one employee is regulated exogenously. I show that pay disclosure can be detrimental for effort provision if employees are treated unequally. (JEL A13, C92, J31)

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Pay secrecy is often justified on the ground of concerns about the detrimental consequences of intra‐firm pay comparisons for work morale and performance. Surprisingly, however, there is only limited empirical evidence that the availability of pay comparison information is detrimental for effort provision. In this paper, I study pay comparison effects in a gift‐exchange game laboratory experiment where an employer is matched with two symmetric employees. I compare effort choices made by employees in a “pay secrecy” treatment and in two “public wages” treatments where employees are informed of the wage paid to the co‐worker. In one “public wages” treatment the employer can choose both wages she pays to the employees, while in the other treatment the wage paid to one employee is regulated exogenously. I show that pay disclosure can be detrimental for effort provision if employees are treated unequally. (JEL A13, C92, J31)

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 37 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Pay secrecy is often justified on the ground of concerns about the detrimental consequences of intra‐firm pay comparisons for work morale and performance. Surprisingly, however, there is only limited empirical evidence that the availability of pay comparison information is detrimental for effort provision. In this paper, I study pay comparison effects in a gift‐exchange game laboratory experiment where an employer is matched with two symmetric employees. I compare effort choices made by employees in a “pay secrecy” treatment and in two “public wages” treatments where employees are informed of the wage paid to the co‐worker. In one “public wages” treatment the employer can choose both wages she pays to the employees, while in the other treatment the wage paid to one employee is regulated exogenously. I show that pay disclosure can be detrimental for effort provision if employees are treated unequally. (JEL A13, C92, J31)

Key concepts: Secrecy, Wage, Economics, Labour economics, Work (physics), Empirical evidence, Business, Engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
PAY SECRECY AND EFFORT PROVISION — Research Paper | ScholarLens