ABSTRACT: The use of tangible rewards in the form of non-cash incentives with a monetary value has become increasingly common in many organizations (Peltier et al. 2005). Despite their use, the behavioral and performance effects of tangible rewards have received minimal research attention. Relative to cash rewards, we predict tangible rewards will have positive effects on goal commitment and performance but will lead employees to set easier goals, which will negatively affect performance. The overall performance impact of tangible rewards will depend on the relative strength of these competing effects. We conduct a quasi-experiment at five call centers of a financial services company. Employees at two locations earned cash rewards for goal attainment while employees at three locations earned points, with equivalent retail value to cash rewards, redeemable for merchandise. Results show that cash rewards lead to better performance through their effects on the difficulty of the goals employees selected. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. Data Availability: The data used in this study are available upon request.

Traditional financing sources such as private and public equity may not be ideal for investment projects with low probabilities of success, long time horizons, and large capital requirements. Nevertheless, such projects, if not too highly correlated, may yield attractive risk-adjusted returns when combined into a single portfolio. Such “megafund” portfolios may be too large to finance through private or public equity alone. But with sufficient diversification and risk analytics, debt financing via securitization may be feasible. Credit enhancements (i.e., derivatives and government guarantees) can also improve megafund economics. We present an analytical framework and illustrative empirical examples involving cancer research.

Choices involving risk significantly affect the distribution of income and wealth in society. This paper reports the results of the first experiment, to our knowledge, to study fairness views about risk-taking, specifically whether such views are based chiefly on ex ante opportunities or on ex post outcomes. We find that, even though many participants focus exclusively on ex ante opportunities, most favor some redistribution ex post. Many participants also make a distinction between ex post inequalities that reflect differences in luck and ex post inequalities that reflect differences in choices. These findings apply to both stakeholders and impartial spectators. (JEL D63, D81, H23)

Participating in insurgency is physically risky. Why do people do so? Using new data on 3,799 payments to insurgent fighters by Al Qa'ida Iraq, we find that: (i) wages were extremely low relative to outside options, even compared to unskilled labor; (ii) the estimated risk premium is negative; and (iii) the wage schedule favors equalization and provides additional compensation for larger families. These results challenge the notion that fighters are paid their marginal product, or the opportunity cost of their time. They may be consistent with a “lemons” model in which fighters signal commitment by accepting low wages.