Narrow Results

Extrinsic motivation can play a healthy role in influencing student performance, however, in the developing world without outside intervention, the provider of such extrinsic motivation is usually one with limited means, such as the village school teacher, or a parent struggling to make ends meet. Hence, this paper asks the question: Can limited extrinsic motivation affect academic performance? In particular, we look at two types of extrinsic motivation: small rewards and some encouragement and examine which does a better job to motivate students. We find in this study that the promise of a reward leads to improvement in scores during the treatment period, however, encouragement improves student performance in the post-treatment period (during the national primary school leaving examination).

The compensation received by economic agents reflects their performance. Usually compensation reflects performance measured cardinally, but sometimes ordinal considerations play a role. It is well established that rewards — cardinal or ordinal — can rationally motivate contestants to put forth increased effort. We ask whether rewards, and in particular their cardinal or ordinal nature, can affect agents' strategies. Specifically, if level of effort is fixed and degree of difficulty is the only choice, what strategy is optimal? For example, in a high-jump competition, level of effort is not a meaningful variable; what is of interest is the choice of strategy — the height attempted, or degree of difficulty. We study how optimal strategies reflect reward structure, assuming that rewards may depend on level of difficulty, and go only to successful candidates, or only to candidates who succeed at more difficult tasks. Basing our conclusions in part on simple probabilistic models in which optimal choices can be determined analytically, we show how the structure of competitive rewards alters contestants' rational choices. We adopt a contest-design framework: What combinations of fixed and variable prizes cause contestants to select degrees of difficulty that maximize the contest designer's expected payoff? Our general conclusion is that competition can affect strategic choices, in magnitudes and even directions that are difficult to predict.

This qualitative research study examined perceptions and current practices of structuring innovation in the knowledge management platform by questioning employees of companies in the greater New York metropolitan area. The 69 participants involved were enrolled in graduate-level distance learning courses offered by a fully-accredited higher education institution. Many participants in the study agreed with the premise of this paper that innovation policies can and should be structured into knowledge management systems. However, it was stated by a minority in the study group that officially setting up the innovation polices with the KM system is not truly feasible, although it is a worthy goal. Nevertheless, the concepts of innovation and knowledge are closely related, and within organisations today it is a tremendous missed opportunity if knowledge management systems are not developed and structured from the start with innovation in mind as a continual outcome.

Growth and success of an organisation are primarily dependent on its ability to develop, leverage, and utilise its knowledge base. This study developed a model to test the impact of antecedents of knowledge Sharing (KS) on team performance. The antecedents were classified as organisational characteristics (structure, learning culture, employee training, reward system, top management support) and individual characteristic (emotional intelligence). The study is based on data collected with the help of structured questionnaires from 582 team members working under 69 teams in 26 surveyed organisations in India. Results suggest that high emotional intelligence increases the extent of KS and hence, has positive impact on team performance among cross-functional team members. Moreover, mutual trust among team members moderates KS behaviour and team performance. Thus, findings confirm the applicability and predictive power of the proposed model. Furthermore, this model contributes to the literature of predicting KS practices in cross-functional projects.

Evaluations of “radicality” of innovations are mostly related to final products and services, however, examination of innovative ideas earlier on has an important implications for future innovations. Organisational members make decisions on whether or not to propose innovative ideas to the agenda. These decisions are often based on their personal judgements and perceptions. In this paper, a categorisation of innovative ideas by low, medium and high degree of radicality is proposed. The objective is to, on one hand, demonstrate the correctness of the categorisation proposed and, on the other hand, retrieve insights on how the level of radicality of products is conceived by practitioners. The results of a quasi-experimental investigation report that radicality of innovation relates to a degree of change in products. Based on perceptions of practitioners, with an increase in degree of radicality of innovative ideas, the value for rewards enhances.

Practitioners increasingly use innovation contests to harness the knowledge of external crowds for internal innovation purposes in exchange for prize money. While some innovation contests have the objective to attract professional experts from distant fields to obtain technical solutions, other innovation contests primarily target customers or users in order to generate new product and service ideas. Hence, external crowds differ substantially across, but also within, innovation contests in terms of personal needs in the innovation domain. Drawing upon the private-collective model of innovation, we argue that participants’ “userness” in terms of personal needs gives rise to non-monetary reward expectations and collectively oriented participation as opposed to the private pursuit of monetary rewards emphasised in innovation contests. Hence, the effectiveness of monetary rewards in innovation contests is bound to certain participants and behaviours. In particular, participants weigh non-monetary rewards more strongly against monetary rewards (1) when their personal need in the innovation domain is high, and (2) when choosing to engage collectively in evaluating and commenting on other contributions as opposed to submitting own contributions. We find support for these hypotheses in an empirical study where user participation in a real innovation contest is regressed on survey-based measures of expected rewards that users perceive prior to the contest. The observed effect sizes of the proposed shifts from monetary to non-monetary rewards are so pronounced that for a given level of personal need and a given type of participation behaviour only either reward type is effective and a compensational relation between both types of rewards does not exist. Monetary rewards are even detrimental and lower user participation if the two proposed boundary conditions are taken together.