A recent trend in organizations is to motivate employees with goal‐based prosocial rewards, whereby employees must donate their rewards to charities upon goal attainment. We examine the motivational effects of goal‐based prosocial rewards versus cash rewards under different levels of goal difficulty. We develop our hypotheses based on affective valuation theory, which posits that when valuing uncertain outcomes by affect rather than calculation, individuals are largely insensitive to changes in probability of the outcomes, including probability of goal attainment. Experiment results support our hypotheses. Specifically, we find that employees who are rewarded with prosocial (vs. cash) goal‐based rewards are more likely to adopt an affective valuation approach. Consequently, when employees are assigned either an easy goal or a stretch goal, their effort is higher when incentivized with a goal‐based prosocial reward than a cash reward. Furthermore, there is a less curve‐linear relationship between goal difficulty and effort with prosocial (vs. cash) goal‐based rewards. These findings highlight for incentive system designers the motivational advantage of goal‐based prosocial rewards relative to traditional cash rewards. Furthermore, we extend the academic literature by showing how affect‐rich rewards such as prosocial rewards can influence employees' assessment of the probability of goal attainment.

Recent management trends highlight two techniques firms use to motivate employee effort: (1) fostering employees' organizational identification (OI) and (2) offering employees tangible rewards such as gift cards instead of cash rewards. We use three studies to examine how OI affects employees' reward valuation and how such effects differ depending on the reward type. Study 1 is an experiment, demonstrating that increasing OI increases the emphasis participants place on a reward's symbolic value, which then increases the total value of the reward—to a larger extent when the reward is tangible than when it is cash. Study 2 is an experiment, providing evidence that Study 1 results are robust to using a tangible reward that is not socially consumed, that is selected either by the firm or by the employee, and that is either a good or poor fit with the employee's personal preference. Finally, Study 3 is a survey, asking respondents about actual rewards they received from their current employer and capturing their actual OI with their current employer. Results in Study 3 are inferentially similar to those in Study 1 and Study 2, albeit stronger for rewards of smaller monetary value. Collectively, these results highlight the particular benefit of strong OI on how employees value tangible rewards relative to cash rewards, which should be of interest to incentive system designers.

We investigate the effects of tangible versus cash rewards in a repeated tournament setting. Firms frequently use tangible rewards to motivate employees, but minimal research has examined their effects relative to cash rewards. We conducted a field experiment at a rug wholesaler that held two consecutive sales tournaments for its retailers. The top three retailers in each tournament received either cash rewards or tangible rewards (gift cards) to be distributed to sales staff. We do not find significant effects of reward type in the first tournament. However, in the second tournament, retailers eligible for tangible rewards significantly outperformed those eligible for cash rewards, and this effect is driven by Tournament One losers. Our results are consistent with the theory that Tournament One losers competing for tangible rewards increased sales effort in the second tournament significantly more than their counterparts competing for cash rewards. Our results have practical and theoretical implications.

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.

Firms commonly employ leaderboards within their peer-to-peer recognition programs. We experimentally investigate how ranking basis—variation in the measure firms use to determine leaderboard rankings—affects employees’ proactive helping behavior. We find that leaderboards ranking employees based on the number of times peer-to-peer recognition is received decrease proactive helping compared with when no leaderboard is provided. Conversely, leaderboards ranking employees based on the number of times peer-to-peer recognition is given increase proactive helping compared with when no leaderboard is provided. These findings underscore the influence of ranking basis on shaping motives linked to proactive helping behavior. Furthermore, these findings highlight for firms the importance of judiciously selecting a ranking basis when utilizing peer-to-peer recognition leaderboards.

Performance-contingent cash and tangible rewards are commonly used to motivate employees, and the taxation of such rewards is unavoidable. We use two experiments to examine how the effect of reward taxation on employee effort varies by reward type. In Experiment 1, we find reward taxation decreases positive affect, increases negative affect, and decreases reward attractiveness for employees when rewards are tangible, but not when rewards are cash. In Experiment 2, we find reward taxation reduces employee effort when rewards are tangible, but not when rewards are cash. Collectively, this evidence advances knowledge at the intersection of tax and management accounting by explaining why reward type alters the effect of reward taxation on employee effort. Moreover, our experimental results inform managers of a potential downside to using tangible rewards to motivate employees. Data Availability: Authors will make data available on request.