A Platform Rating System and Vulnerable Workers: Evidence from Field Experiments in Singapore

SSRN Electronic Journal · 2026-01-01

A Platform Rating System and Vulnerable Workers: Evidence from Field Experiments in Singapore

Organization Science · 2026-04-21

Rating systems are a common governance tool on two-sided platforms. Research suggests that, via indirect network effects, rating systems benefit participants on both the rating side and the rated side. However, participants on the rated side may not always recognize the benefits of the rating system and may respond negatively to its introduction. The rating side may anticipate the rated side’s negative reactions and react negatively as well, especially when the rated side holds more power over the rating side. To empirically examine participants’ reactions to a proposed platform rating system in the context of a substantial cross-side power differential, we conducted two field experiments in collaboration with a Singapore-based labor platform that connects foreign domestic workers with employers (families). We found that employers, on average, were indifferent to the proposed rating system, even when the benefits to them were highlighted, with the highest-income employers exhibiting negative responses. We also found that workers reacted negatively, with those informed of the proposed rating system completely disengaging from the platform. Post hoc interviews and analyses support our interpretation that power differential underlies workers’ negative responses to the rating system. This study contributes to the literature on platform rating systems by demonstrating that, in the presence of a substantial cross-side power imbalance, rating systems may not always be perceived positively, even by participants on the rating side, whom the system aims to empower. It also constitutes one of the first efforts in management research to study domestic workers, a highly vulnerable population of workers. Funding: This work was supported by Chazen Institute of Global Business (Columbia University) and INSEAD. Supplemental Material: The online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.18153 .

Picking a Side: Consumer Responses to Sociopolitical Stances

Academy of Management Proceedings · 2025-07-01

A growing body of research considers how consumers react when companies become aligned with a stance on a polarized sociopolitical issue. Because stances on controversial issues can yield polarized and potentially offsetting responses from different consumer groups, it is important to understand individual-level reactions rather than only look at overall effects. Prior studies of individual responses have examined customer reactions to specific companies supporting a particular side of a given issue. However, no study has examined whether the resulting reactions may differ depending upon the side the company supports. This may limit the generalizeability of these findings, especially because sociopolitical alignment tends to be disproportionately carried out by a small number of companies and predominantly in support of left-wing positions on a small number of issues. We thus provide the first evidence on how customers react to corporate alignment on different sides of the same issue. We do this with two experiments involving well-known real-world companies (Bud Light and McDonald’s) which simultaneously were aligned with different stances on two controversial issues (transgender rights and Israel-Palestine). We find asymmetrically negative effects of sociopolitical alignment on customers: consumers react negatively when a company supports the opposing side but do not react positively when it supports the side they prefer. While the direction of consumer reactions are asymmetrically negative, this effect is symmetric across opposing stances on the same issue.

The Substitution Effect of Future Orientation and Female Leadership on CSR

Academy of Management Proceedings · 2025-07-01

Research has examined various antecedents of corporate social responsibility (CSR); however, potential substitution effects between different antecedents underlying the decision of whether and how much to invest in CSR as well as individual-level microfoundations remain underexplored. We address this gap by developing theory on the substitutability of two key microfoundations of CSR: future orientation (FO) and female leadership (FL). We integrate these two streams of CSR research to develop theory about their substitution effect on CSR. Recognizing endogeneity issues involved in this relationship, we conduct analysis at three levels. Study 1 confirms that FO increases perceptions of the importance of CSR in men but not in women (individual level). Study 2 confirms that all-male groups invest less in CSR and take a shorter-term view on this decision (group level). Study 3 confirms the substitution effect in practice using a cross-national sample of 1,710 firms with country-level FO and CEO and board gender diversity as key independent variables (firm level). By identifying the nuanced relationship between FO and FL in their effect on CSR using multilevel mixed-methods analysis, this paper pushes the boundaries of CSR research. We argue that while both FL and FO have been independently linked to increased CSR, a strong FO may compensate for the effects of FL, and vice versa. Given the paucity of women in leadership positions as well as the overwhelming tendency toward short-termism in the corporate world, identifying a substitution effect of these two antecedents on CSR has important theoretical, ethical, and practical implications.

The use of <scp>LLMs</scp> to annotate data in management research: Foundational guidelines and warnings

Strategic Management Journal · 2025-10-29 · 11 citations

Abstract Research Summary The emergence of large language models (LLMs) offers new opportunities for AI integration in research, particularly for data annotation and text classification. However, researchers lack guidance on implementation best practices, as the benefits and risks of these tools remain poorly understood. We develop a foundational framework for effective LLM implementation in management research, providing structured guidance on key decisions throughout the research process. We illustrate this framework through an empirical application: classifying sustainability claims in crowdfunding projects. While LLMs can match or exceed traditional methods' performance at lower cost, we find that variations in prompt design can significantly affect results and downstream analyses. We develop procedures for sensitivity analysis and provide detailed documentation to help researchers implement robustness while maintaining methodological integrity. Managerial Summary Large language models (LLMs) offer powerful new tools for business research, especially for analyzing and categorizing text data. However, managers and researchers lack clear guidance on how to use these tools effectively and reliably. This study creates a practical framework for implementing LLMs in management research, covering key decisions from model selection to result validation. Using a real‐world example of analyzing sustainability claims in crowdfunding campaigns, we demonstrate that LLMs can match traditional methods while being faster and cheaper. However, small changes in how you instruct the AI can significantly alter results and business conclusions. We provide systematic procedures for testing result reliability and offer practical tools to help managers implement AI‐powered analysis while maintaining rigorous standards and avoiding misleading findings.

When (not) to talk politics in business: Experimental evidence

Strategic Management Journal · 2025-02-25 · 13 citations

Abstract Research Summary Chief executive officer (CEO) political activism is increasing, but its strategic implications remain unclear. We conduct two survey‐based experiments to shed light on how individuals respond to CEO activism. We differentiate between communicating an apolitical stance versus saying nothing ‐ an unexplored distinction to date. We furthermore examine whether characteristics which could influence perceived credibility of the stance ‐ whether it is consistent with expectations and whether it is backed by monetary commitment ‐ influence responses. We thus contribute to a deeper understanding of whether and how individuals’ perceptions of the firm are affected by CEO activism. Managerial Summary It is critical for managers to understand the implications of engaging in CEO political activism, a practice which has been on the rise in recent decades. Actively communicating an apolitical stance versus passively staying silent about an issue are two separate strategic choices available to managers which have been unexplored in the literature to date. This paper sheds light on how individuals respond to firms' communicating an apolitical stance, saying nothing, or taking an ideological stance in either direction on a political issue; and how this varies depending on whether the stance is perceived as consistent with expectations and whether it is backed by monetary commitment. It thus helps managers navigate stance‐taking on political issues.

The Use of LLMs to Annotate Data in Management Research: Warnings, Guidelines, and an Application to Organizational Communication

SSRN Electronic Journal · 2024-01-01 · 2 citations

Gender Differences in Preferences for Meaning at Work

American Economic Journal Economic Policy · 2024-07-31 · 5 citations

Scholars have examined whether preferences for job characteristics help explain why men and women sort into different occupations but have overlooked preferences for meaning at work. We first document gender differences in preferences for meaning in a large-scale survey covering individuals in 47 countries. We then conduct a choice-based conjoint analysis of a cohort of MBA students at a leading business school to study gender differences in preferences for meaning compared to other job attributes. We show that gender differences in preferences for meaning at work are widespread and partly explain gender differences in behavioral outcomes, including industry of work. (JEL D91, I23, J16, J24, J28)

Navigating Inequality in Entrepreneurship: Strategies and Evaluations of Marginalized Entrepreneurs

Academy of Management Proceedings · 2024-07-09

Accessing resources, and subsequent success, is not equal for all entrepreneurs. Questions about disparities in entrepreneurship have garnered major attention in the literature. Marginalized individuals face pervasive barriers as a result of stakeholders and investors’ biases. While past research has shown inherent barriers posed by marginalized identities, scant research has examined the strategic actions of both the entrepreneurs themselves and the supporting organizations in shaping these marginalized entrepreneurs’ journeys and outcomes. Thus, our symposium aims to advance our understanding of how marginalized entrepreneurs and their supporting organizations, such as training programs and investment funds, navigate the challenges posed by marginalized identities. Our presenters explore various strategies and their effectiveness from the side of entrepreneurs and involved agencies in supporting marginalized entrepreneurs overcome challenges associated with their marginalized identities. We center around two interrelated questions: What strategies are employed by entrepreneurs who possess marginalized identities and the organizations that assist them in overcoming various challenges associated with marginalized identities? Under what conditions do these strategies successfully support marginalized entrepreneurs, and when do they not? Together, the presentations provide implications for social inequality and pose questions for future research, such as how narrative disclosure helps overcome stigma, how entrepreneurship can override negative status beliefs, how interactions between entrepreneurs and supporting agencies shape entrepreneurial journeys, how evaluation processes may fail to create a more level playing field for marginalized entrepreneurs, and what communication strategies towards marginalized entrepreneurs can effectively increase participation in training programs. Collectively, these papers underscore the resilience and resourcefulness of entrepreneurs from under-represented backgrounds and the importance of creating supportive ecosystems that acknowledge and address the unique challenges they face. Stigma Disclosure in Entrepreneurial Narratives among Justice-Impacted Individuals Author: Yixi Chen; Columbia Business School Author: Kylie Jiwon Hwang; Northwestern Kellogg School of Management Entrepreneurial Activity as a Way to Override a Stigmatized Immigrant Status Author: Sandra Portocarrero; Columbia Business School Author: Dan Jun Wang; Columbia Business School Playing A Serious Game: North Korean Refugees’ Journey to Become an Entrepreneur in South Korea Author: Yunjung Pak; U. of Alberta Author: Suntae Kim; Johns Hopkins Carey Business School Author: Simon (Seongbin) Yoon; U. of California, Irvine Author: Hyo Young Lee; Boston U. Questrom School of Business Evaluating entrepreneurial potential Author: Amisha Miller; NYU Stern Author: Siobhan O'Mahony; Boston U. The Impact of Communication Frames on Necessity Entrepreneurs’ Participation in Training Programs Author: Florencio F. Portocarrero; London School of Economics and Political Science Author: Vanessa Burbano; Columbia Business School Author: Michael White; Columbia Business School

Does Employer Prosociality Reduce or Augment Wage Inequality?

Academy of Management Proceedings · 2023-07-24

A growing body of research demonstrates that some workers are willing to accept lower wages from employers that engage in prosocial activity. This symposium brings together a range of scholars who are examining how variation across workers in this propensity to trade wages for prosociality may exacerbate or ameliorate wage inequality. On one hand, some work suggests that higher-earning workers (including those that are more educated and more productive) are more willing to give up wages for prosociality. From this perspective, employers will more successfully substitute prosociality for wages when recruiting relatively higher-earning workers and thus reduce income inequality. On the other hand, other work suggests that groups that already tend to earn less (including women and workers from lower social classes) may be more inclined to trade prosociality for wages. From this contrasting perspective, employers will more successfully trade prosociality for wages when recruiting relatively lower-earning workers and thus augment wage inequality. A fundamental question underpinning these emergent perspectives is whether and to what extent employers recognize and respond to variation in preferences for prosociality in terms of the wages they offer. This symposium will provide a venue for scholars at the forefront of these questions to share their research with the AOM community, benefit from audience and discussant comments, and chart avenues for future research. Prosocial Claims and the College Wage Gap Author: Nathan Wilmers; Massachusetts Institute of Technology Gender Differences in Preferences for Meaning at Work Author: Vanessa Burbano; Columbia Business School Values and Inequality Revisited: How Prosocial Claims Augment the Gender Wage Gap Author: Mariana Oseguera; U. of Toronto, Rotman School of Management Prosocial Occupations, Work Autonomy, and the Origins of the Social Class Pay Gap Author: Ray Fang; Boise State U.