Possible explanations for earnings differentials in self‐employment and paid employment are investigated. The empirical results suggest that the nonpecuniary benefits of self‐employment are substantial: Most entrepreneurs enter and persist in business despite the fact that they have both lower initial earnings and lower earnings growth than in paid employment, implying a median earnings differential of 35 percent for individuals in business for 10 years. The differential cannot be explained by the selection of low‐ability employees into self‐employment and is similar for three alternative measures of self‐employment earnings and across industries. Furthermore, the estimated earnings differentials may understate the differences in compensation across sectors since fringe benefits are not included in the measure of employee compensation.

Many randomized experiments are plagued by attrition, even among subjects receiving more effective treatments. We estimate the subject’s utility associated with the receipt of treatment, as revealed by dropout behavior, to evaluate treatment effects. Utility is a function of both “publicly observed” outcomes and side effects privately observed by the subject. We analyze an influential AIDS clinical trial, ACTG 175, and show that for many subjects, AZT yields the highest level of utility despite having the smallest impact on the publicly observed outcome because of mild side effects. Moreover, although subjects enter the experiment uncertain of treatment effectiveness (and often the treatment received), the learning process implies that early dropout in ACTG 175 is primarily driven by side effects, whereas later attrition reflects declining treatment effectiveness.

This paper identifies and evaluates rationales for team participation and for the effects of team composition on productivity using novel data from a garment plant that shifted from individual piece rate to group piece rate production over three years. The adoption of teams at the plant improved worker productivity by 14 percent on average. Productivity improvement was greatest for the earliest teams and diminished as more workers engaged in team production, providing support for the view that teams utilize collaborative skills, which are less valuable in individual production. High-productivity workers tended to join teams first, despite a loss in earnings in many cases, suggesting nonpecuniary benefits associated with teamwork. Finally, more heterogeneous teams were more productive, with average ability held constant, which is consistent with explanations emphasizing mutual team learning and intrateam bargaining.