To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

Monitoring for Worker Quality

Journal of Labor Economics 2017 35(3), 755-785 open access
Much nonmanagerial work is routine, with all workers having similar output most of the time. However, failure to address occasional challenges can be very costly, and consequently easily detected, while challenges handled well pass unnoticed. We analyze job assignment and worker monitoring for such “guardian” jobs. If monitoring costs are positive but small, monitoring is nonmonotonic in the firm’s belief about the probability that a worker is good. The model explains several empirical regularities regarding nonmanagerial internal labor markets: low use of performance pay, seniority pay, rare demotions, wage ceilings within grade, and wage jumps at promotion.

Employee Crime and the Monitoring Puzzle

Journal of Labor Economics 1989 7(3), 331-347 open access
The simplest economic theories of crime predict that profit-maximizing firms should follow strategies of minimal monitoring with large penalties for employee crime. We investigate possible reasons why firms actually spend considerable resources trying to detect employee malfeasance. We find that the most plausible explanations for firms' large outlays on monitoring of employees-legal restrictions on penalty clauses in contracts and the adverse impact of harsh punishment schemes on worker morale-are also consistent with the payment of premium (rent-generating) wages by cost-minimizing firms.

Do Elite Universities Overpay Their Faculty?

The Review of Economics and Statistics 2026 open access
No. Elite institutions offer high salaries because they hire the most valued faculty. Moreover, in contrast to the broader labor market, faculty are equally likely to move up and down the prestige ladder, and they increase their salary either way. We speculate that these facts reflect the visible nature of faculty productivity and the sporadic nature of academic job openings.