Performance, Promotion, and the Peter Principle

S-Tier
Journal: Review of Economic Studies
Year: 2001
Volume: 68
Issue: 1
Pages: 45-66

Authors (2)

James A. Fairburn (not in RePEc) James M. Malcomson (Oxford University)

Score contribution per author:

4.022 = (α=2.01 / 2 authors) × 4.0x S-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

This paper considers why organizations use promotions, rather than just monetary bonuses, to motivate employees even though this may conflict with efficient assignment of employees to jobs. When performance is unverifiable, use of promotion reduces the incentive for managers to be affected by influence activities that would blunt the effectiveness of monetary bonuses. When employees are risk neutral, use of promotion for incentives need not distort assignments. When they are risk averse, it may—sufficient conditions for this are given. The distortion may be either to promote more employees than is efficient (the Peter Principle effect) or fewer. "Promotions serve two roles in an organization. First, they help assign people to the roles where they can best contribute to the organization's performance. Second, promotions serve as incentives and rewards." (Milgrom and Roberts (1992, p. 364)) "Promotions are used as the primary incentive device in most organizations, including corporations, partnerships, and universities … This … is puzzling to us because promotion-based incentive schemes have many disadvantages and few advantages relative to bonus-based incentive schemes." (Baker, Jensen and Murphy (1988, p. 600))

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:oup:restud:v:68:y:2001:i:1:p:45-66.
Journal Field
General
Author Count
2
Added to Database
2026-01-25