ACCT3206 Study Guide - Final Guide: Tournament, The Incentive, Downside Risk
Can incentives improve group creativity? – Research Paper 11 (Chen, Williamson and
Zhou)
In the current paper, teams are either working under a group incentive scheme or an individual
incentive scheme (Chen et al. 2012). The incentive scheme can be a tournament or a piece-rate
reward. This paper illustrated that under the group-based tournament incentives schemes, members
in the same group become more united and more willing to share their ideas to increase the
creativity of the group solution.
Groups are important in developing creativity in the corporate environment. The paper examines an
environment where 3-person groups develop a creative solution to a problem. The author examines
whether or not piece-rate or tournament pay can be used to increase the level of group and
individual creativity. The paper predicts that group tournament pay will be more effective relative to
group piece-rate pay and that individual piece-rate pay will be more effective relative to individual
tournament pay.
Question 1:
Which behaviour of the participants improves the group solution and which behaviour has no
effect on the group solution?
• The behaviors that have a positive effect on the group are a) increased collaboration among
group members. b) group members share ideas and build on each other’s ideas c) the group
forms an alliance against a common enemy.
• Behavior with no effect on the group a) everyone attempts to come up with an idea on their
own. b) individual effort is not as effective as the efforts of a collective.
• The participants who are more willing to share their ideas, listen to each other and build on
each other ideas can improve the group solution.
• Compared to group-based pieces rate, the participants are more cohesive under the group-
based tournament, because the tournament system only greatly benefits the winning group,
so the participants are view group member are more honest than their competitors.
• The individual effort has no effect on the group solution.
• According to this paper, even individual put on more their effort, they did not listen to and
build on others’ ideas, therefore, individual effort does not enhance the group solution.
• Behaviours of the participants improve the group solution are: a. providing ideas that build
up on each other’s ideas; b. sharing ideas with each other; c. listening to each.
• Behaviours that have no effect on the group solution: individual efforts that aim to improve
the creativity but fail to generate more creative ideas.
• There are three behaviors that can improve group solution, which are
o 1. share ideas with group member
o 2. Build on from each other’s idea
o 3. Listen to group member’s ideas.
• So that the group tournament incentive has more creativity than the group piece rate
incentive. Group tournament incentive only benefit the more creative group; thus, members
are more united to work as a group with share and building ideas to work out the best group
solution.
• The individual tournament incentive has no effect on the group solution as individual tends
to focus more on their own benefit rather than a group, because the bonus is based on the
individual’s effort.
• This leads to individual tournament group fails to share, build more creative ideas and less
united for a group solution, which does not enhance group creativity. Individual with piece
rate incentive has more creative ideas than the tournament.
Document Summary
In the current paper, teams are either working under a group incentive scheme or an individual incentive scheme (chen et al. The incentive scheme can be a tournament or a piece-rate reward. This paper illustrated that under the group-based tournament incentives schemes, members in the same group become more united and more willing to share their ideas to increase the creativity of the group solution. Groups are important in developing creativity in the corporate environment. The paper examines an environment where 3-person groups develop a creative solution to a problem. The author examines whether or not piece-rate or tournament pay can be used to increase the level of group and individual creativity. The paper predicts that group tournament pay will be more effective relative to group piece-rate pay and that individual piece-rate pay will be more effective relative to individual tournament pay. Build on from each other"s idea: 3.
