Published and Accepted Work
Bargaining and Inequality in the Labor Market (with Sydnee Caldwell and Jörg Heining) [Online Appendix] [Slides] [NBER Working Paper no. 33396] [IAB-Discussion Paper 2/2025] [Upjohn Institute WP] [Upjohn Institute Policy Brief]
Accepted, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2025
Abstract: We use novel surveys of firms and workers, linked to administrative employer-employee data, to study the prevalence and importance of individual bargaining in wage determination. We show that simple survey questions accurately elicit firms' bargaining strategies. Using the elicited strategies for 772 German firms, we document that the majority of firms are willing to engage in individual wage bargaining. Labor market factors predict firms' strategies better than firm characteristics. Survey responses from nearly 10,000 full-time workers indicate that most workers provide their salary expectations before they receive a job offer. Most outside offers are rejected, with the worker remaining at the incumbent firm. There is substantial heterogeneity in workers' bargaining behavior, which translates into within-firm wage inequality. Firms that set pay via individual bargaining have a 3 percentage point higher gender wage gap.
Working Papers
Talent Hoarding in Organizations
Revised & Resubmitted (2nd Round), American Economic Review
Awards: Young Labour Economist Prize 2021 of the European Association of Labour Economists , W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research Dissertation Award Honorable Mention, Max Weber-Preis 2022 Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Outstanding Poster Award 2021 ACLEC
Coverage: Süddeutsche Zeitung, The Economist, Marginal Revolution, The Visible Hand Podcast
Abstract: Most organizations rely on managers to identify talented workers. However, managers who are evaluated on team performance have an incentive to hoard workers. This study provides the first empirical evidence of talent hoarding using personnel records and survey evidence from a large firm. Talent hoarding is self-reported by three-fourths of managers, is detectable in manager ratings of worker talent, and occurs more frequently under stronger hoarding incentives, proxied by performance-related pay, team size, and talent visibility. Using quasi-random exposure to talent hoarding, I show that hoarding deters internal job applications, inhibiting career progression and altering talent allocation in the firm.
The Broken Rung: Gender and the Leadership Gap
Awards: UniCredit Foundation Best Paper Award on Gender Economics 2022, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research Dissertation Award Honorable Mention, Max Weber-Preis 2022 Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Coverage: My Collective Podcast, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Podcast Datenaffäre
Abstract: Addressing female underrepresentation in leadership positions has become a key policy objective. However, little is known about the extent to which leadership appeals differently to women. Surveys with employees from a large multinational firm document that taking on leadership over a team, which is a salient feature of career advancement in many organizations, is less appealing to women than men. This gender difference is not accounted for by psychological traits or perceptions of treatment as a leader. Instead, my findings suggest that women—even those not facing family constraints—perceive the tasks that team leadership involves as more burdensome. Drawing on the universe of job application and vacancy data at the firm, I show that these gender differences translate into meaningful differences in realized career outcomes, and limit the firm’s ability to fill leadership roles.
Why Workers Stay: Pay, Beliefs, and Attachment (with Sydnee Caldwell and Jörg Heining) [Online Appendix] [Survey Appendix] [NBER Working Paper No. 33445] Previously circulated as "Firm Pay and Worker Search"
Abstract: Workers often remain with their employer even when outside firms offer higher pay. This may reflect information frictions or preferences. We use a large-scale survey of full-time German workers, linked to Social Security records, to elicit pay expectations and preferences over specific outside firms. Workers believe outside pay varies across firms and direct their search toward higher-paying employers. Expected pay premia are highly correlated with administrative pay measures observed and with workers’ amenity valuations. Yet most workers would not switch firms—even for substantial raises at named destination firms. Implied switching costs range from 7 to 18% of annual pay. Attachment varies across firms and is not explained by amenities or switching costs, suggesting residual firm-specific factors shape mobility.
