Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Control in a Teamwork Environment—The Impact of Social Ties on the Effectiveness of Mutual Monitoring Contracts

Open access
Towry, Kristy L.·2003·The Accounting Review

Abstract

This study examines control in a teamwork setting, experimentally investigating two financial incentive systems that have been proposed in the agency-theory-based analytic literature. Both systems rely on mutual monitoring—the ability of team members to observe each other's actions. However, the systems differ on whether team members report observations of their peers' efforts to management (vertical incentive system) or directly control the actions of each other (horizontal incentive system). Findings suggest that the effectiveness of these systems depends on the level of team identity. Specifically, a strong team identity leads to greater coordination. The result is that the effectiveness of a vertical incentive system is degraded by a strong team identity. On the other hand, a horizontal incentive system becomes more effective in the presence of a strong team identity. The results of this study suggest that when the team has achieved a high level of identity, the most effective way to use this information is likely horizontal in nature, delegating responsibility for control to self-managed teams, rather than extracting the information through reporting mechanisms. This study thus helps explain why firms have more readily embraced horizontal incentive systems than vertical incentive systems.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2308/accr.2003.78.4.1069

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Towry, K. L.
Venue
The Accounting Review
Published
2003-10-01
Volume
78
Issue
4
Pages
1069-1095
ISSN
  • 0001-4826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-7967
OpenAlex
W2095033825
Cited by
287
References
5
FWCI
7.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.