Behavior Change for Good

Max   Bazerman; Michael  Luca; Marie  Lawrence

Case | HBS Case Collection | March 2020

Behavior Change for Good

by Max Bazerman, Michael Luca and Marie Lawrence

Abstract

In 2017, Katy Milkman and Angela Duckworth created Behavior Change for Good (BCFG)—a behavioral science initiative founded with the goal of helping people achieve long-term behavior change in the areas of personal health, financial decisions (savings), and education. The initiative centered around a simple idea—by partnering with large customer-facing organizations such as gyms and banks, BCFG could design interventions aimed at changing habits of these organizations’ customers. The earliest BCFG experiments focused on increasing exercise, partnering with two major gym chains—24 Hour Fitness and Blink Fitness. The gyms were on board with the idea of nudging members to exercise more and continue their memberships. But what interventions might lead their gym members to have better exercise habits? And how will they decide if an intervention is successful?

Keywords: behavioral science; interventions; Behavior; Change; Health;

Language: English

Format: Print

16 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Bazerman, Max, Michael Luca, and Marie Lawrence. "Behavior Change for Good." Harvard Business School Case 920-049, March 2020.

The Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) aimed to quickly deliver hundreds of billions of dollars of loans to small businesses, with the loans administered via private banks. In this paper, we use firm-level data to document the demand and supply of PPP funds. Using an instrumental variables approach, we find that PPP loans led to a 14 to 30 percentage point increase in a business’s expected survival, and a positive but imprecise effect on employment. Moreover, the effects on survival were heterogeneous and highlight an important tradeoff faced by policymakers: while administering the loans via private banks allowed for rapid delivery of funds, it also limited the government’s ability to target the funding—instead allowing pre-existing connections between businesses and banks to determine which firms would benefit from the program.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, states issued and then rescinded stay-at-home orders that restricted mobility. We develop a model of learning by deregulation, which predicts that lifting stay-at-home orders can signal that going out has become safer. Using restaurant activity data, we find that the implementation of stay-at-home orders initially had a limited impact, but that activity rose quickly after states’ reopenings. The results suggest that consumers inferred from reopening that it was safer to eat out. The rational, but mistaken inference that occurs in our model may explain why a sharp rise of COVID-19 cases followed reopening in some states.

To explore the impact of COVID on small businesses, we conducted a survey of more than 5,800 small businesses between March 28 and April 4, 2020. Several themes emerged. First, mass layoffs and closures had already occurred—just a few weeks into the crisis. Second, the risk of closure was negatively associated with the expected length of the crisis. Moreover, businesses had widely varying beliefs about the likely duration of COVID-related disruptions. Third, many small businesses are financially fragile: the median business with more than $10,000 in monthly expenses had only about two weeks of cash on hand at the time of the survey. Fourth, the majority of businesses planned to seek funding through the CARES act. However, many anticipated problems with accessing the program, such as bureaucratic hassles and difficulties establishing eligibility. Using experimental variation, we also assess take-up rates and business resilience effects for loans relative to grants-based programs.

Faculty & Research

Behavior Change for Good

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors

Faculty & Research

Behavior Change for Good

Abstract

Citation:

Related Work

About the Authors

More from these Authors