TY - JOUR
T1 - The Negative Consequences of Loss-Framed Performance Incentives
AU - Pierce, Lamar
AU - Rees-Jones, Alex
AU - Blank, Charlotte
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© (2025), (American Economic Association). All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Behavioral economists have proposed that incentive contracts result in higher productivity when bonuses are “loss framed”—prepaid then clawed back if targets are unmet. We test this claim by randomizing the pre- or postpayment of sales bonuses at 294 car dealerships. Although somewhat statistically imprecise, our analysis provides strong indications that the random assignment of loss framing had quantitatively important negative effects. We document that the negative effects of loss framing can arise due to an increase in incentives for “gaming” behaviors. Based on these claims, we reassess the common wisdom regarding the desirability of loss framing.
AB - Behavioral economists have proposed that incentive contracts result in higher productivity when bonuses are “loss framed”—prepaid then clawed back if targets are unmet. We test this claim by randomizing the pre- or postpayment of sales bonuses at 294 car dealerships. Although somewhat statistically imprecise, our analysis provides strong indications that the random assignment of loss framing had quantitatively important negative effects. We document that the negative effects of loss framing can arise due to an increase in incentives for “gaming” behaviors. Based on these claims, we reassess the common wisdom regarding the desirability of loss framing.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105001206874
U2 - 10.1257/pol.20220512
DO - 10.1257/pol.20220512
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105001206874
SN - 1945-7731
VL - 17
SP - 506
EP - 539
JO - American Economic Journal: Economic Policy
JF - American Economic Journal: Economic Policy
IS - 1
ER -