Awards as Signals

Awards are widespread in all countries and are prevalent both in the public sphere and in the private sector. This paper argues, and empirically supports, that awards serve public functions and economists should take them seriously. Using a unique cross-country data set, we suggest that awards serve as signals. Awards are more prevalent the more difficult the position and status of an individual is to observe due to an anonymous and globalized setting.awards, signals, status, anonymity, globalization

Fostering Public Good Contributions with Symbolic Awards: A Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment at Wikipedia

This natural field experiment tests the effects of purely symbolic awards on volunteer retention in a public goods context. The experiment is conducted at Wikipedia, which faces declining editor retention rates, particularly among newcomers. Randomization assures that award receipt is orthogonal to previous performance. The analysis reveals that awards have a sizeable effect on newcomer retention, which persists over the four quarters following the initial intervention. This is noteworthy for indicating that awards for volunteers can be effective even if they have no impact on the volunteers’ future career opportunities. The awards are purely symbolic, and the status increment they produce is limited to the recipients’ pseudonymous online identities in a community they have just recently joined. The results can be explained by enhanced self-identification with the community, but they are also in line with recent findings on the role of status and reputation, recognition, and evaluation potential in online communities. Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2540 . This paper was accepted by John List, behavioral economics

The Blockbuster Punitive Damages Awards

This paper provides an analysis of 64 punitive damages awards of at least $100 million. Based on an inventory of these cases, there is evidence that these blockbuster awards are highly concentrated geographically, as two states account for 27 of the 64 awards.The awards also have been rising substantially over time, with the majority of these blockbuster awards taking place since 1999.An assessment of the current status of the blockbuster punitive damages awards indicates that most of these awards have been appealed, but the reversal of these punitive damages awards is the exception rather than the rule.Many large punitive damages awards are settled without any appeal. The ratio limits outlined in State Farm v. Campbell will affect over 90% of the blockbuster awards and over 90% of the damages associated with these awards if a ratio of 1.0 becomes the upper limit on punitive damages.

Standing up for teaching: the 'crime' of striving for excellence

In recent years a proliferation of local and national teaching awards has occurred in many countries. The new language of excellence has led institutions and policy-makers to embrace teaching awards. Although these award schemes harbour competing and coexisting drivers and appeal to different stakeholders for different reasons, they have helped to raise the profile and importance of teaching in higher education. At the same time, the idea of recognising individuals as excellent teachers remains distasteful to many educators. Awards remain controversial as they compete with traditional ideals of egalitarianism which dominate the education profession. In the backdrop of lingering controversy, this short opinion paper reflects on the costs of standing up for teaching after applying for and successfully winning a National Award for Sustained Excellence in Teaching. Using an acronym it describes the CRIME of excellence and makes the case for teaching awards criteria to recognise critical forms of scholarship. While definitions of excellence will always be contestable it argues that teaching awards are not mutually exclusive from an individual ethos of striving for continuous improvement. The paper concludes that the education profession does a great disservice to the status of teaching if we shame and snipe away at those judged by peers as our best

The U.N. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and Issue Preclusion: A Traditional Collateral Estoppel Determination

Although the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards provides for the “recognition” and “enforcement” of non-domestic arbitral awards in commercial disputes,1 this article will show that in order for an issue resolved through arbitration to be granted preclusive effect in subsequent litigation in the United States, the proponent must also satisfy the traditional requirements of collateral estoppel. In this way, the Convention’s reach is not quite as expansive as a party might expect, for the ensuing judicial analysis often involves complex questions of law and fact while maintaining respect for the favored status of international commercial arbitration. The result is far from per se preclusivity

Two Essays on Antecedents and Effects of Award-Winning CEOS

A vibrant stream of research in strategic management examines CEO reputation, status, media coverage, and awards on firm outcomes. This dissertation examines antecedents that impact the likelihood of CEOs gaining higher visible status —such as winning awards — and the impact of such status on firm behavior. The dissertation addresses these issues in two essays. In the first essay, we use signaling theory to frame the impact of industry characteristics, firm level strategic initiatives, and demographic factors on the likelihood of CEOs winning awards. Specifically, in this essay we examine how industry structure, corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives, business strategies, and CEO gender impact the likelihood of CEOs winning awards. We tested our hypotheses using S&P 500 firms and found that firm CSR initiatives were positively associated with the likelihood of CEOs winning awards; but industry structure, firms’ focus on advertising and R&D, and CEO gender had no impact. In the second essay, we use prospect theory (PT) and behavioral theory of the firm (BTOF) to examine whether CEOs who win awards engage in risk-taking behavior and are likely to initiate substantive strategic change, or such CEOs become complacent and committed to status-quo. We used S&P 500 data to test our hypotheses and found that award-winning CEOs were less likely to engage in strategic change; further, performance below or above firm aspirations had no impact on subsequent strategic behavior. Thus, the results help resolve the contradictory assertions in the CEO award literature. The theoretical contributions to the literatures on CEO awards, firm strategic change, and BTOF are discussed

Consent Awards in International Arbitration: From Settlement to Enforcement

Although over a third of all arbitration proceedings result in settlement agreements very little has been written on the legal status of consent awards in international arbitration. Drawing on comparative analysis of procedural rules and practice of major arbitration tribunals, domestic law of common and civil law jurisdictions, this Article presents the first major study of consent awards in international arbitration. Consent awards, being effectively settlement agreements recorded by arbitration tribunals as awards, raise a number of difficult legal questions, ranging from the right of arbitrators to refuse recoding the settlement as a consent award to the possible use of consent awards to cover illegal activities. Understanding what makes consent awards different from “normal” arbitration awards will help successfully navigate from settlement to enforcement

Financial Implications of the 7th NFC Award and the Impact on Social Services

The financial status of provincial governments in Pakistan hinges largely on federal transfers to the provinces constituted through National Finance Commission (NFC) Awards. These awards design the formula of distribution of resources between federal and provincial governments, and among the provinces for five years. Historically, federal and all provincial governments have tried their level best to get a higher share of the revenues in order to stabilise their own financial status. As a result, there are very few examples of consensus based conclusive awards in the past. These consensus based awards have had different gainers. For instance, in the NFC Award 1991, provincial governments were the main beneficiaries as they received substantially higher shares of buoyant taxes such as sales and income taxes. In contrast, the largest beneficiary of the NFC Award 1997 was the federal government as it allocated higher shares of all taxes to itself in order to stabilise its financial status. Given the sensitivity attached to NFC awards, where an increase or decrease in the share of any tier of the government affects the share of other tiers with the same magnitude in the opposite direction, it seems very difficult to develop a consensus among federal and provincial governments. As a result, since the separation of East Pakistan, there have been only three conclusive NFC Awards (1974, 1991, 1997) and one presidential distribution order (2006) prior to the 7th NFC Award

The Blockbuster Punitive Damages Awards

This paper provides an analysis of 64 punitive damages awards of at least $100 million. Based on an inventory of these cases, there is evidence that these blockbuster awards are highly concentrated geographically, as two states account for 27 of the 64 awards. The awards also have been rising substantially over time, with the majority of these blockbuster awards taking place since 1999. An assessment of the current status of the blockbuster punitive damages awards indicates that most of these awards have been appealed, but the reversal of these punitive damages awards is the exception rather than the rule. Many large punitive damages awards are settled without any appeal. The ratio limits outlined in State Farm v. Campbell will affect over 90% of the blockbuster awards and over 90% of the damages associated with these awards if a ratio of 1.0 becomes the upper limit on punitive damages

Professional standards support for curriculum mentors: report on the TDA funded ‘Professional Standards Support for Curriculum mentors’ at the University of Southampton

A revised framework of professional standards for teachers was published by the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA). These standards replaced existing teacher standards in September 2007 and form a clear, progressive framework of standards for teachers. The standards are statements of a teacher's professional attributes, knowledge and understanding, and skills. Importantly they clarify expectations at each career stage helping teachers identify how they need to develop professionally to progress in their careers.• the awards of Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) (Q)• teachers on the main scale (Core) (C)• teachers on the upper pay scale (Post Threshold Teachers) (P)• Excellent Teachers (E)• Advanced Skills Teachers (ASTs) (A)The Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) made funding available to help support initial teacher training (ITT) providers in meeting the revised qualified teacher status (QTS) standards which came into effect in September 2007. A Guidance to accompany the standards for Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) was also produced by the TDA<br/