Vol. 13 No. 26 (2018)

Artículos

Determinants of productivity of worker: effects of diffeent types of payments to work and the average duration of the labor day

Published 2025-12-07

  • Alejandro Rodríguez Arana

Alejandro Rodríguez Arana
Universidad Iberoamericana image/svg+xml , Ibero American University image/svg+xml , Universidad Iberoamericana image/svg+xml

Abstract

A model is proposed where workers must meet a certain workday in advance, but where, in a certain range, they can choose the effort that is made at work. When the hourly wage contains a fixed component and a reward for the effort, the response of said effort to changes in the award described is very similar to that of the job offered at the hourly wage in the basic model of job offer. On the other hand, policies aimed at reallocating the workday, for example with systems such as work at home (home office), increase the effort. The reduction of the working day increases the effort and the hourly wage, it has a great possibility of increasing the total effective work, but it has a high possibility of reducing the total salary.

Keywords

Work effort, workday, reward for effort, productivity

PDF (Spanish)

References

  1. Akerlof, G. y J. Yellen (1990). "The fair wage hypothesis and unemployment". Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105, pp. 255-283.
  2. Becker, G (1964). Human Capital. Columbia University Press and NBER. Nueva York.
  3. ___(1977). "A Theory of the production and allocation of effort". NBER Working Paper 184. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
  4. Blundell, R and T. Macurdy (1999). "Labor supply: A review of alternative approaches". Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 3, capitulo 27. Asherfelter, O y D. Card (editores). Elsevier Science.
  5. Borjas, G. (2016), Labor Economics. McGraw Hill Education.
  6. Denison, E. (1962). The sources of economic growth in the United States and the alternatives before us. Committee for Economic Development, Nueva York.
  7. Feenstra, R. L. Inklaar y M. Timmer (2015). The next generation of the Penn World Table". American Economic Reviero, 105, pp. 3150-3182.
  8. Heckman, J. (2015). "Introduction to a theory of allocation of time by Gary Becker". Economic Journal, 125, pp. 403-409.
  9. Hill, E. J.; M. Ferris y V. Martinson (2003). "Does it matter where you work? A comparison of how three work venues; traditional office, virtual office and home office, influence aspects of work and personal/family life", Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, pp. 220-241.
  10. Juster, T. F. y F. Stafford (1991). "The allocation of time: Empirical findings, behavioral models and problems of measurement", Journal of Economic Literature, 29, pp. 471-522.
  11. Lucas, R. (1988). "On the Mechanism of Economic Development". Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, pp. 3-42.
  12. Pencavel, J. (2014). "The productivity of working hours". IZA Discussion Paper 8129. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). Bonn, Alemania.
  13. Prescott, E. (1986). "Theory ahead of business cycles measurement". Quarterly Review. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 10, pp. 9-22.
  14. Prescott, E. (1986a). "Response to a skeptic". Quarterly Review. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 10, pp. 28-33.
  15. Shapiro, C. y J. Stiglitz (1984). "Equilibrium unemployment as a discipline device". American Economic Review, 74, pp. 433-444.
  16. Solow, R. (1979), "Another possible source of wage stickiness". Journal of Macroeconomics, 1, pp. 79-82.
  17. Summers, L. (1986). Some skeptical observations in real business cycle theory. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 10, pp. 23-27.
  18. Uzawa, H. (1965). "Optimal technical change in an aggregative model of economic growth." International Economic Review, 6-1, pp. 18-31.

Most read articles by the same author(s)