Academic Research
“You Knew What You Were Getting Into”: Perspective Differences in Gauging Informed Consent
We examine differences between perceived and experienced consent in organizational contexts—specifically, the aspect of consent that reflects how informed consenters feel. We theorize that people tasked with soliciting consent overestimate the extent to which consenters feel fully informed of what they are agreeing to and thus feel they have truly consented. We provide support for these predictions across six pre-registered studies (N = 2,993) and eight supplemental pre-registered studies (N = 4,406) that establish causal and mediation evidence, downstream organizational consequences, and real-world relevance. This research reveals that even when an agreement meets the legal criteria for consent, there may be misaligned perceptions of employees’ feelings of consent, with consequences for employees’ relationship with their organization. The current studies offer a significant step forward in understanding the markedly understudied role of consent in organizations.
Paper Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104386
Authors: Rachel Schlund, Vanessa K. Bohns
ABSTRACT
We examine differences between perceived and experienced consent in organizational contexts—specifically, the aspect of consent that reflects how informed consenters feel. We theorize that people tasked with soliciting consent overestimate the extent to which consenters feel fully informed of what they are agreeing to and thus feel they have truly consented. We provide support for these predictions across six pre-registered studies (N = 2,993) and eight supplemental pre-registered studies (N = 4,406) that establish causal and mediation evidence, downstream organizational consequences, and real-world relevance. This research reveals that even when an agreement meets the legal criteria for consent, there may be misaligned perceptions of employees’ feelings of consent, with consequences for employees’ relationship with their organization. The current studies offer a significant step forward in understanding the markedly understudied role of consent in organizations.
The Motivating Power of Streaks: Increasing Persistence Is as Easy as 1, 2, 3
Organizations often use financial incentives to boost employees’ commitment to work-relevant goals in an effort to increase persistence and goal achievement (e.g., to improve organizational efficiency or sales). We introduce and test a novel incentive scheme designed to enhance persistence by increasing commitment to the goal of maximizing earnings. Specifically, we test “streak incentives,” or rewards that offer people increasing payouts for completing multiple consecutive work tasks. Across six pre-registered studies (total N = 4,504), we show that, contrary to standard economic models suggesting people will complete more piece-rate work for larger rewards, people actually complete more work when compensated with streak incentives than with larger, stable incentives. We theorize that this occurs because, by encouraging consecutive task completion, streak incentives increase commitment to a goal of maximizing earnings, which in turn increases persistence. We also show that this effect is not driven by providing increasing rewards; rather, people’s goal commitment and motivation are boosted by the requirement that they complete work tasks consecutively to earn escalating payments. Taken together, our results suggest that designing incentives to encourage streaks of work is a low-cost way to increase goal commitment and therefore persistence in organizations and other contexts.
Organizations often use financial incentives to boost employees’ commitment to work-relevant goals in an effort to increase persistence and goal achievement (e.g., to improve organizational efficiency or sales). We introduce and test a novel incentive scheme designed to enhance persistence by increasing commitment to the goal of maximizing earnings. Specifically, we test “streak incentives,” or rewards that offer people increasing payouts for completing multiple consecutive work tasks. Across six pre-registered studies (total N = 4,504), we show that, contrary to standard economic models suggesting people will complete more piece-rate work for larger rewards, people actually complete more work when compensated with streak incentives than with larger, stable incentives. We theorize that this occurs because, by encouraging consecutive task completion, streak incentives increase commitment to a goal of maximizing earnings, which in turn increases persistence. We also show that this effect is not driven by providing increasing rewards; rather, people’s goal commitment and motivation are boosted by the requirement that they complete work tasks consecutively to earn escalating payments. Taken together, our results suggest that designing incentives to encourage streaks of work is a low-cost way to increase goal commitment and therefore persistence in organizations and other contexts.