link to my JMP 👇
drive.google.com/file/d/1YGzA...

💬 Curious to learn more?

Check out my paper or visit my website here
👉 [https://sites.google.com/view/heloise-clolery/home]
if you want to learn more about my research!

6/ Policy takeaways:

✅ Quotas improve team performance when composition effects aren’t negative.
✅ Even if quotas worsen selection, there is no evidence of harm to team performance.

In short:
Behavioral improvements balance any selection concerns!

5/ Even when quotas lead to negative selection (i.e., less competent individuals are promoted), I find no drop in team performance.

Why?

Because the behavioral effects offset the selection losses.
➡️ Net effect ≈ zero change in overall team performance.

4/ Because quotas improve coordination:

Quota ➡️ less information about relative abilities
➡️ players provide more accurate performance signals ➡️ teams identify who has the correct answer more effectively

3/ I find a positive behavioral effect

💹 Teams’ score is multiplied by x1.3 when promoted with a quota and w/o any selection effect

Why?

2/ In my JMP, I use a lab experiment to open the black box of team decision-making

I disentangle two channels:
1️⃣ Composition effect: who’s in the team when there’s a quota
2️⃣ Behavioral effect: how teams make decisions under a quota

1/ The literature finds mixed effects of quotas on team performance

But most studies look at 1 mechanism only: the selection effects = whether the quota promotes more or less qualified individuals

I go a step further 👇