arbiter
JournalsAccount

Silent or Salient? Ability Heterogeneity in Tournaments

Hao He

Accounting Horizons2026https://doi.org/10.2308/horizons-2023-009article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

SYNOPSIS I experimentally investigate the influence of the degree heterogeneity among employees’ abilities and the salience of this knowledge on the effectiveness of relative performance information (RPI) on performance in tournaments. Consistent with predictions, results show that RPI is more motivating or effective when employees’ abilities are of similar levels, or homogeneous, and also the knowledge of abilities is more highly salient than when employee abilities are perceived as more heterogeneous. Also, making homogeneous ability salient affects high and low performers differently. The results suggest that firms should be conscious of employee ability differences when using tournament incentives. Disclosing the low ability difference benefits firms when the participating employees are relatively homogeneous in ability, whereas the cost of not disclosing becomes high among the best employees. Data Availability: Data are available from the author upon request. JEL Classifications: J24; D83; D84; M41; M52.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2308/horizons-2023-009

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{hao2026,
  title        = {{Silent or Salient? Ability Heterogeneity in Tournaments}},
  author       = {Hao He},
  journal      = {Accounting Horizons},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2308/horizons-2023-009},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Silent or Salient? Ability Heterogeneity in Tournaments

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.