Communicating Resource Scarcity

Grant E. Donnelly; Anne  Wilson; A.V.  Whillans; Michael I. Norton

Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

Communicating Resource Scarcity

by Grant E. Donnelly, Anne Wilson, A.V. Whillans and Michael I. Norton

Abstract

The development and maintenance of interpersonal relationships require investments of both money and time—resources that are often limited in supply, but in great demand. Indeed, consumers are regularly asked to dedicate their money and time to social engagements, and need to manage these resources efficiently. Therefore, consumers often choose to cite insufficient time or money as an excuse for rejecting social invitations. But how does using the excuse of financial versus time scarcity influence interpersonal relationships? Across eight experiments, we demonstrate that using financial scarcity as an excuse (e.g., “I don’t have money”) increases perceptions of interpersonal closeness and helping behavior compared to using time scarcity as an excuse (e.g., “I don’t have time”). This effect is explained by the fact that time is perceived as a more personally controllable resource than money, resulting in consumers who cite financial (vs. temporal) constraints as being perceived as more trustworthy. However, excuse-givers do not correctly predict this difference in interpersonal outcomes. These findings advance our theoretical understanding of how excuses revolving around resource constraints affect interpersonal perceptions and behaviors and provides practical insights for consumers desiring to minimize social repercussions when turning down social invitations.

Keywords: interpersonal relationships; time; Communication; Relationships; Money; Perception;

Language: English

Format: Print

87 pages

Read Now

Citation:

Donnelly, Grant E., Anne Wilson, A.V. Whillans, and Michael I. Norton. "Communicating Resource Scarcity." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-066, January 2019.

Deadlines are one of the biggest sources of stress in the workplace. Yet, many are flexible: Your manager might ask you to submit a proposal for a long-term project by Friday, but not plan to look at it until Tuesday. Could asking for more time (when we need it) be a simple way to avoid feeling panicked and overwhelmed? While it’s common to believe that pushing back a deadline might reflect poorly on us and be seen as unprofessional, we know relatively little from research about the actual consequences of asking for more time. To better understand this, we conducted 10 experiments and a survey with nearly 10,000 employees and managers in the United States. We found that, across occupations, asking for more time to work on an assignment was, on average, perceived positively by managers—and it reduced employees’ stress levels and improved their performance. In one survey—of 191 employees—we found that 95% of those who asked their manager for a deadline extension received one.

Time is a finite and precious resource, and the way that we value our time can critically shape happiness. In this article, we present a conceptual framework to explain when valuing time can enhance vs. undermine well-being. Specifically, we review the emotional benefits of valuing time more than money and discuss the emotional costs of valuing time like money. Lastly, we suggest directions for future research examining the causes and consequences of the value that people place on their time.

Article | Compensation & Benefits Review | April, 2019

The Power of Workplace Rewards: Using Self-Determination Theory to Understand Why Reward Satisfaction Matters for Workers Around the World

Anais Thibault Landry and A.V. Whillans

How can workplace rewards promote employee well-being and engagement? To answer these questions, we utilized self-determination theory to examine whether reward satisfaction predicted employee well-being, job satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and affective commitment, as well as valuable organizational outcomes, such as workplace contribution and loyalty. Specifically, we investigated the role of three universal psychological needs—autonomy, competence and relatedness—in explaining whether and why reward satisfaction matters for employees’ well-being. We tested our model in a large, cross-sectional study with full-time employees working for multinational corporations in six main world regions: Asia, Europe, India, Latin America, North America and Oceania (N = 5,852). Consistent with our theorizing, we found cross-cultural evidence that reward satisfaction promoted greater employee functioning through psychological need satisfaction, contributing to better organizational outcomes. Critically, our results were consistent regardless of geographic location. As such, this study provides some of the strongest evidence to date for the power of understanding psychological mechanisms in the workplace: Regardless of the actual rewards that employees received, how workplace rewards made employees feel significantly predicted their optimal functioning.

Keywords: workplace; rewards; motivation;

Citation:

Landry, Anais Thibault, and A.V. Whillans. "The Power of Workplace Rewards: Using Self-Determination Theory to Understand Why Reward Satisfaction Matters for Workers Around the World." Compensation & Benefits Review (April, 2019). View Details

Cite View Details Read Now

Faculty & Research

Communicating Resource Scarcity

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors