RESEARCH, 2021 1

RESEARCH2021

Doctoral Programs

2 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

RESEARCH, 2021 3

The Doctoral Programs at Harvard Business School educate scholars who make a difference in the world through rigorous academic research that influences practice.

More than 125 strong, Harvard Business School doctoral students represent diverse experiences and backgrounds. They examine the most critical issues in management through relevant research, creating and disseminating new knowledge as the next generation of thought leaders. By the time they graduate, students will have authored and co-authored publications with Harvard Business School faculty members and Harvard University professors, who become important mentors, colleagues, and collaborators. After completing their degree, HBS doctoral alumni continue to conduct research with both students and faculty. Harvard Business School’s ever growing community of scholars continue to build knowledge that makes a difference in the world.

ACCOUNTINGAmel-Zadeh, Amir, Alexandra Scherf, and Eugene F. Soltes. “Creating Firm Disclosures.” Journal of Fi-nancial Reporting 4, no. 2 (Fall 2019): 1–31.

Chen, Wilbur, and Suraj Srinivasan. “Going Digital: Implications for Firm Value and Performance.” Har-vard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-117, May 2019. (Revised July 2020.)

Eliner, Liran, Anywhere Sikochi, and Suraj Srini-vasan. “Going Local: The Effects of a Local Pres-ence by Global Rating Agencies.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-083, February 2020.

Eyring, Henry C., Patrick J. Ferguson, and Sebastian Koppers, “Less Information, More Comparison, and Bet-ter Performance: Evidence from a Field Experiment.” Journal of Accounting Research (forthcoming).

Ferguson, Patrick J., and Karim R. Lakhani. “Con-suming Contests: Outcome Uncertainty and Specta-tor Demand for Contest-based Entertainment.” Har-vard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-087, February 2021.

Nguyen, Trang T., and Charles C.Y. Wang. “Steward-ship Codes and Shareholder Voting on Disputed Bal-lot Measures.” Harvard Business School Working Pa-per, No. 20-035, September 2019.

Srinivasan, Suraj, and Wilbur Chen. “Research: In-vestors Reward Companies That Talk Up Their Dig-ital Initiatives.” Harvard Business Review (website) (June 18, 2019).

ABSTRACT

Henry Eyring, Patrick J. Ferguson, and Sebastian Koppers, “Less Infor-mation, More Comparison, and Bet-ter Performance: Evidence from a Field Experiment.” Journal of Ac-

counting Research (forthcoming).

We use a field experiment in professional sports to compare effects of providing absolute, relative, or both absolute and relative measures in performance reports for employees. Although studies have docu-mented that the provision of these types of measures can benefit performance, theory from economic and accounting literature suggests that it may be opti-

4 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

mal for firms to direct employees’ attention to some types of measures by omitting others. In line with this theory, we find that relative performance infor-mation alone yields the best performance effects in our setting—that is, that a subset of information (rel-ative performance information) dominates the full information set (absolute and relative performance information together) in boosting performance. In cross-sectional and survey-data analyses, we do not find that restricting the number of measures shown per se benefits performance. Rather, we find that restricting the type of measures shown to convey only relative information increases involvement in peer-performance comparison, benefitting perfor-mance. Our findings extend research on weighting of and responses to measures in performance reports.

BUSINESS ECONOMICSBastianello, Francesca, and Paul Fontanier. “Partial Equilibrium Thinking in General Equilibrium”. Work-ing Paper, April 2021.

Blank, Michael, Samuel G. Hanson, Jeremy C. Stein, and Adi Sunderam. “How Should U.S. Bank Regu-lators Respond to the COVID-19 Crisis?” Hutchins Center Working Paper, No. 63, June 2020.

Bordalo, Pedro, Nicola Gennaioli, Spencer Yongwook Kwon, and Andrei Shleifer. “Diagnostic Bubbles.” NBER Working Paper Series, No. 25399, December 2018.

Burton, M. Diane, Shawn Cole, Abhishek Dev, Christina Jarymowycz, Leslie Jeng, Josh Lerner, Fanele Mashwa-ma, Yue (Cynthia) Xu, and T. Robert Zochowski. “The Project on Impact Investments’ Impact Investment Da-tabase.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-117, May 2020. (Revised February 2021.)

Cole, Shawn A., Rob T. Zochowski, Fanele Mashwa-ma, and Heather McPherson. “Anchors Aweigh: Anal-ysis of Anchor Limited Partner Investors in Impact In-vestment Funds.” Working Paper, May 2020.

Dafny, Leemore S., Eric Barrette, and Karen Shen. “Do Policies to Increase Access to Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder Work?” Working Paper, February 2021.

Dafny, Leemore S., Yin Wei Soon, Zoë Cullen, and Christopher T. Stanton. “How Has COVID-19 Affect-ed Health Insurance Offered by Small Businesses in the U.S.? Early Evidence from a Survey.” NEJM Catalyst Innovations in Care Delivery (August 14, 2020). (Commentary.)

Di Maggio, Marco, Angela Ma, and Emily Williams. “In the Red: Overdrafts, Payday Lending and the Underbanked.” NBER Working Paper Series, No. 28242, December 2020.

Egan, Mark, Alexander J. MacKay, and Hanbin Yang. “Recovering Investor Expectations from Demand for Index Funds.” NBER Working Paper Series, No.

26608, January 2020. (Revise and Resubmit at the Review of Economic Studies. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-122, May 2020. Di-rect download. Revised August 2020.)

Gentzkow, Matthew, Michael B. Wong, and Allen T. Zhang. “Ideological Bias and Trust in Information Sources.” Working Paper, 2018.

Gerardi, Kristopher, Paul Willen, and David Hao Zhang. “Mortgage Prepayment, Race, and Monetary Policy.” Working Paper, September 2020.

Gillis, Talia B. “Putting Disclosure to the Test: To-ward Better Evidence-Based Policy.” Loyola Con-sumer Law Review 28, no. 1 (2015): 31–105.

Gillis, Talia B., and Jann Spiess. “Big Data and Dis-crimination.” University of Chicago Law Review 86, no. 2 (April 2019): 459–487.

Gillis, Talia B., and Joshua Simons. “Explanation Justification: GDPR and the Perils of Privacy.” Jour-nal of Law & Innovation 2 (2019): 71–99.

Glaeser, Edward L., Michael Luca, and Erica Moszkowski. “Gentrification and Neighborhood Change: Evidence from Yelp.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-074, December 2020.

Ishii, Jun, and David Hao Zhang. “Options Compen-sation as a Commitment Mechanism in Oligopoly Competition.” Managerial and Decision Economics 38, no. 4 (June 2017): 513–525.

Jackson, Howell E., and Talia B Gillis. “Fiduciary Law and Financial Regulation.” In The Oxford Hand-book of Fiduciary Law, edited by Evan J. Criddle, Paul B. Miller, and Robert H. Sitkoff. New York: Ox-ford University Press, 2019.

Levin-Konigsberg, Gabriel, Calixto Lopez, Fabrizio Lopez-Gallo, and Serafın Martınez-Jaramilloa. “In-ternational Banking and Cross-Border Effects of Reg-ulation: Lessons from Mexico.” International Journal of Central Banking (March 2017).

Lilley, Andrew, Matthew Lilley, and Rinaldi, Gi-anluca. “Public Health Interventions and Econom-ic Growth: Revisiting The Spanish Flu Evidence.” Working Paper, July 2020.

Lilley, Andrew, and Rinaldi, Gianluca. “Currency Be-tas and Interest Rate Spreads.”. Working Paper, Oc-tober 2018 (Revised July 2020).

Lilley, Matthew, and Robert Slonim. “Gender Differ-ences in Altruism: Responses to a Natural Disaster.” IZA (Institute of Labor Economics) Discussion Paper Series, No. 9657, January 2016.

Lilley, Matthew, Richard Holden, and Michael Keane. “Peer Effects on the United States Supreme Court.” Working Paper, February 2017.

RESEARCH, 2021 5

Lite, Samuel, William J. Gordon, and Ariel Dora Stern. “Association of the Meaningful Use Electronic Health Record Incentive Program with Health Infor-mation Technology Venture Capital Funding.” JAMA Network Open 3, no. 3 (March 2020).

Liu, Tianwang, and David Hao Zhang. “Do Judge-Lawyer Relationships Influence Case Out-comes?” Working Paper, October 2020.

Pflueger, Carolin and Gianluca Rinaldi. “Why Does the Fed Move Markets So Much? A Model of Mone-tary Policy and Time-Varying Risk Aversion.” Work-ing Paper, September 2020.

Rinalidi, Gianluca. “Learning from Liquidation Pric-es.” Working Paper, November 2020.

Saar, Gideon, Jian Sun, Ron Yang, and Haoxiang Zhu. “From Market Making to Matchmaking: Does Bank Regulation Harm Market Liquidity?” Working Paper, May 2019.

Schubert, Gregor. “House Price Contagion and U.S. City Migration Networks.” Working Paper, January 2021.

Schubert, Gregor, Anna Stansbury, and Bledi Tas-ka. “Employer Concentration and Outside Options.” Working Paper, December 2020.

Shen, Karen, Eric Barrette, and Leemore S. Dafny. “Treatment Of Opioid Use Disorder Among Commer-cially Insured U.S. Adults, 2008–17.” Health Affairs 39, no. 6 (June 2020): 993–1001.

Shy, Oz, Rune Stenbacka, and David Hao Zhang. “His-tory-based versus Uniform Pricing in Growing and De-clining Markets.” International Journal of Industrial Or-ganization 48 (September 2016): 88–117.

Townsend, Wilbur, and Dean Hyslop. “Earnings Dy-namics and Measurement Error in Matched Survey and Administrative Data.” Journal of Business & Eco-nomic Statistics 38, no.2 (2020), 457-469.

Townsend, Wilbur, and Yu-Wei Luke Chu. “Joint Cul-pability: The Impact of Medical Marijuana Laws on Crime.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organiza-tion 159 (March 2019).

Wang, Jeffrey, and David Hao Zhang. “The Cost of Banking Deserts: Racial Disparities in Access to PPP Lenders and their Equilibrium Implications.” Work-ing Paper, December 2020.

Zhang, David Hao, and Paul Willen. “Do Lenders Still Dis-criminate? A Robust Approach for Assessing Differences in Menus.” Working Paper, September 2020.

Zhang, David Hao. “Semi-Parametric Estimation of Dynamic Discrete Choice Models.” Working Paper, April 2018.

Zhang, David Hao. “Should You Refinance Your Mortgage with Your Current Lender?” MortgageWaldo.com (2018). https://mortgagewaldo.com/mortgage-research/should-you-refinance-your-mortgage-with-your-current-lender/.

Zhang, David Hao. Discussion of “Identification of Dynamic Games with Multiple Equilibria and Unob-served Heterogeneity with Application to Fast Food Chains In China,” by Yao Luo, Ping Xiao, Ruli Xiao. International Industrial Organization Conference (IIOC), Indianapolis, IN, April 21, 2018.

Zhang, David Hao. “How Do People Pay Rent?” Fed-eral Reserve Bank of Boston, Research Data Report, No. 16-2, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Boston, MA, 2016.

Zhuo, Ran, Bradley Huffaker, KC Claffy, and Shane Greenstein. “The Impact of the General Data Protec-tion Regulation on Internet Interconnection.” Tele-communications Policy 45, no. 2 (March 2021).

ABSTRACT

Bastianello, Francesca, and Paul Fontanier. “Partial Equilibrium Thinking in General Equilibrium”. Working Paper, April 2021.

We develop a theory of “Partial Equi-librium Thinking” (PET), whereby agents fail to un-derstand the general equilibrium consequences of their actions when inferring information from endog-enous outcomes. PET generates a two-way feedback effect between outcomes and beliefs, which can lead to arbitrarily large deviations from fundamentals. In financial markets, PET equilibrium outcomes exhib-it over-reaction, excess volatility, high trading vol-ume, and return predictability. We extend our model to allow for rationality of higher-order beliefs, general forms of model misspecification, and heterogenous agents. We show that more sophisticated agents may contribute to greater departures from rationality. We also draw a distinction between models of misinfer-ence and models with biases in Bayesian updating, and study how these two departures from rational-ity interact. Misinference from mistakenly assum-ing the world is rational amplifies biases in Bayes-ian updating.

ABSTRACT

Blank, Michael, Samuel G. Hanson, Jeremy C. Stein, and Adi Sun-deram. “How Should U.S. Bank Regu l a t o r s Re spond t o t h e COVID-19 Crisis?” Hutchins Center

Working Paper, No. 63, June 2020.

Drawing on lessons from the 2007–2009 Global Fi-nancial Crisis (GFC) and a simple conceptual frame-work, we examine the response of U.S. bank regula-tors to the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that the current regulatory strategy of “watchful waiting”—the same strategy that was used during the early stages of the GFC—poses unnecessary risks to the

6 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

financial system and broader U.S. economy. Instead, promoting an early recapitalization of the banking system, by stopping dividends and by encouraging new equity issues, would be a more prudent way to manage the vulnerabilities the pandemic has creat-ed. We close by suggesting additional measures that we believe regulators should take in both the short and long run.

ABSTRACT

Glaeser, Edward L., Michael Luca, and Erica Moszkowski. “Gentrification and Neighborhood Change: Evidence from Yelp.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-074, December 2020.

How does gentrification transform neighborhoods? Gentrification can harm current residents by increas-ing rental costs and by eliminating old amenities, in-cluding distinctive local stores. Rising rents repre-sent redistribution from tenants to landlords and can therefore be offset with targeted transfers, but the de-struction of neighborhood character can – in principle – reduce overall social surplus. Using Census and Yelp data from five cities, we document that while gentri-fication is associated with an increase in the number of retail establishments overall, it is also associated with higher rates of business closure and higher rates of transition to higher price points. In Chicago and Los Angeles especially, non-gentrifying poorer communi-ties have dramatically lower turnover than richer or gentrifying communities. However, the primary tran-sitions appear to the replacement of stores that sell tradable goods with stores that sell nontradable ser-vices. That transition just seems to be slower in poor communities that do not gentrify. Consequently, the business closures that come with gentrification seem to reflect the global impact of electronic commerce more than the replacement of idiosyncratic neighbor-hood services with generic luxury goods.

ABSTRACT

Lilley, Andrew, Matthew Lilley, and Rinaldi, Gianluca. “Public Health In-terventions and Economic Growth: Revisiting The Spanish Flu Evi-dence.” Working Paper, July 2020.

Using data from 43 US cities, Cor-reia, Luck, and Verner [2020] finds that the 1918 Flu pandemic de-creased economic growth, but that Non Pharmaceutical Interventions

(NPIs) mitigated its adverse economic effects. Their starting point is a striking positive correlation be-tween 1914-1919 economic growth and the extent of NPIs adopted at the city level. We show that those results are driven by population growth between

1910 to 1917, before the pandemic. We also extend their difference in differences analysis to earlier pe-riods, and find that once we account for pre-exist-ing differential trends, the estimated effect of NPIs on economic growth are a noisy zero; we can neither rule out substantial positive nor negative effects of NPIs on employment growth.

ABSTRACT

Zhuo, Ran, Bradley Huffaker, KC Claffy, and Shane Greenstein. “The Impact of the General Data Protection Regulation on Internet Interconnection.” Telecommuni-cations Policy 45, no. 2 (March 2021).

The Internet comprises thousands of independently operated networks, interconnected using bi-laterally negotiated data exchange agreements. The Europe-an Union (EU)’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) imposes strict restrictions on handling of personal data of European Economic Area (EEA) res-idents. A close examination of the text of the law sug-gests significant cost to application firms. Available empirical evidence confirms reduction in data usage in the EEA relative to other markets. We investigate whether this decline in derived demand for data ex-change impacts EEA networks’ decisions to intercon-nect relative to those of non-EEA OECD networks. Our data consists of a large sample of interconnec-tion agreements between networks globally in 2015–2019. All evidence estimates zero effects: the num-ber of observed agreements, the inferred agreement types, and the number of observed IP-address-level inter-connection points per agreement. We also find economically small effects of the GDPR on the entry and the observed number of customers of networks. We conclude there is no visible short run effects of the GDPR on these measures at the internet layer.

HEALTH POLICY MANAGEMENTAdler-Milstein, Julia, A Jay Holmgren, Peter Kralovec, Chantel Worzala, Talisha Searcy, and Vaishali Patel. “Electronic Health Record Adoption in U.S. Hospitals: The Emergence of a Digital ‘Advanced Use’ Divide.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Associa-tion 24, no. 6 (November 2017): 1142–1148.

Apathy, Nate C., and A Jay Holmgren. “Opt-in Con-sent Policies: Potential Barriers to Hospital Health Information Exchange.” Special Issue on Health IT edited by Ilana Graetz. American Journal of Managed Care 26, no. 1 (January 2020).

Blasco, Andrea, Olivia S. Jung, Karim R. Lakhani, and Michael Menietti. “Incentives for Public Goods Inside Organizations: Field Experimental Evidence.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 160 (April 2019): 214–229.

RESEARCH, 2021 7

Chen, Lucy, and Benjamin D. Sommers. “Work Re-quirements and Medicaid Disenrollment in Arkan-sas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Texas, 2018.” Amer-ican Journal of Public Health 110, no. 8 (June 18, 2020): 1208–10.

Chen, Lucy, Richard G. Frank, and Haiden A. Hus-kamp. “Overturning the ACA’s Medicaid Expansion Would Likely Decrease Low-Income, Reproductive-Age Women’s Healthcare Spending and Utilization.” IN-QUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provi-sion, and Financing 57 (December 11, 2020).

Chien, Alyna, Michael Anne Kyle, Antoinette S. Pe-ters, Shalini Tendulkar, Molly Ryan, Karen Hacker, and Sara J. Singer. “Establishing Teams: How Does It Change Practice Configuration, Size, and Composi-tion?” Journal of Ambulatory Care Management 41, no. 2 (April–June 2018): 146–155.

Classen, David C., A Jay Holmgren, Zoe Co, Lisa New-mark, Diane Seger, Melissa Danforth, and David W. Bates. “National Trends in the Safety Performance of Electronic Health Record Systems From 2009 to 2018.” JAMA Network Open 3, no. 5 (May 2020).

Co, Zoe, A Jay Holmgren, David C. Classen, Lisa P Newmark, Diane Seger, Melissa Danforth, and David W. Bates. “The Tradeoffs Between Safety and Alert Fatigue: Data from a National Evaluation of Hospital Medication-related Clinical Decision Support.” Jour-nal of the American Medical Informatics Association 27, no.8 (August 2020).

Gallus, Jana, Olivia S. Jung, and Karim R. Lakhani. “Recognition Incentives for Internal Crowdsourc-ing: A Field Experiment at NASA.” Harvard Busi-ness School Working Paper, No. 20-059, November 2019. (Revised May 2020.)

Hayirli, Tuna Cem, and Peter F. Martelli. “Gene Drives as a Response to Infection and Resistance.” Infection and Drug Resistance 12 (2019): 229–234.

Hayirli, Tuna Cem, and Peter F. Martelli. “Three Per-spectives on Evidence-based Management: Rank, Fit, Variety.” Management Decision 56, no. 10 (2018): 2085–2100.

Holmgren, A Jay, Alyssa Botelho, and Allan M. Brandt. “A History of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs in the United States: Political Appeal and Public Health Efficacy.” American Journal of Public Health 110, no. 8 (August 2020).

Holmgren, A Jay, and Eric Ford. “Assessing the Im-pact of Health System Organizational Structure on Hospital Electronic Data Sharing.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 25, no. 9 (September 2018): 1147–1152.

Holmgren, A Jay, and Julia Adler-Milstein. “Does Elec-tronic Health Record Consolidation Follow Hospital Consolidation?” Health Affairs Blog (March 7, 2019).

Holmgren, A Jay, and Julia Adler-Milstein. “Health Information Exchange in U.S. Hospitals: The Current Landscape and a Path to Improved Information Shar-ing.” Journal of Hospital Medicine 12, no. 3 (March 2017): 193–198.

Holmgren, A Jay, and Nate C. Apathy. “Evaluation of Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Integra-tion with Hospital Electronic Health Records by US County-Level Opioid Prescribing Rates.” JAMA Net-work Open 3, no. 6 (June 2020).

Holmgren, A Jay, and Nate C. Apathy. “Hospital Adoption of API-enabled Patient Data Access.” Art. 100377. Healthcare: The Journal of Delivery Sci-ence and Innovation 7, no. 4 (2019).

Holmgren, A Jay, Eric Pfeifer, Milisa Manojlovich, and Julia Adler-Milstein. “A Novel Survey to Ex-amine the Relationship between Health IT Adop-tion and Nurse-Physician Communication.” Applied Clinical Informatics 7, no. 4 (December 2016): 1182–1201.

Holmgren, A Jay, Julia Adler-Milstein, and Jeffrey McCullough. “Are All Certified EHRs Created Equal? Assessing the Relationship between EHR Vendor and Hospital Meaningful Use Performance.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 25, no. 6 (June 2018): 654–660.

Holmgren, A Jay, Julia Adler-Milstein, and Lena M. Chen. “Participation in a Voluntary Bundled Pay-ment Program by Organizations Providing Care After an Acute Hospitalization.” JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association 320, no. 4 (July 24, 2018): 402–404.

Holmgren, A Jay, Lance Downing, David W. Bates, Tait D. Shanafelt, Arnold Milstein, Christopher Sharp, David Cutler, Robert S. Huckman, and Kev-in A. Schulman. “Assessment of Electronic Health Record Use Between U.S. and Non-U.S. Health Sys-tems.” JAMA Internal Medicine 181, no. 2 (Febru-ary 2021): 251–259.

Holmgren, A Jay, Nate C. Apathy, and Julia Ad-ler-Milstein. “Barriers to Hospital Electronic Public Health Reporting and Implications for the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of the American Medical Infor-matics Association 27, no. 11 (November 2020).

Holmgren, A Jay, Vaishali Patel, and Julia Adler-Mil-stein. “Progress In Interoperability: Measuring US Hos-pitals’ Engagement In Sharing Patient Data.” Health Affairs 36, no. 10 (October 2017): 1820–1827.

Holmgren, A Jay, Vaishali Patel, Dustin Charles, and Julia Adler-Milstein. “US Hospital Engagement in Core Domains of Interoperability.” Special Issue on Health IT. American Journal of Managed Care 22, no. 12 (December 2016).

8 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

Holmgren, A Jay, Zoe Co, Lisa Newmark, Melissa Danforth, David Classen, and David W. Bates. “As-sessing the Safety of Electronic Health Records: A National Longitudinal Study of Medication-related Decision Support.” BMJ Quality & Safety 29, no. 1 (January 2020): 52–59.

Jung, Olivia, Andrea Blasco, and Karim R. Lakhani. “Innovation Contest: Effect of Perceived Support for Learning on Participation.” Health Care Management Review 45, no. 3 (July–September 2020): 255–266.

Jung, Olivia, Andrea Blasco, and Karim R. Lakhani. “Organizational Support for Learning and Contribu-tion to Improvement by Frontline Staff.” Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings (2017).

Jung, Olivia, Palak Kundu, Amy C. Edmondson, John Hegde, Nzhde Agazaryan, Michael Steinberg, and Ann Raldow. “Resilience vs. Vulnerability: Psy-chological Safety and Reporting of Near Misses with Varying Proximity to Harm in Radiation Oncology.” Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety 47, no. 1 (January 2021): 15–22.

Kundu, Palak, Olivia Jung, Kathy Rose, Chonlawan Khaothiemsang, Nzhde Agazaryan, Amy C. Edmond-son, Michael L. Steinberg, and Ann C. Raldow. “Psy-chological safety and near miss events in radiation on-cology.” Journal of Clinical Oncology 37 (September 20, 2019): 231–231.

Kyle, Michael Anne, Emma-Louise Aveling, and Sara J. Singer. “A Mixed Methods Study of Change Process-es Enabling Effective Transition to Team-based Care.” Medical Care Research and Review (October 2019).

Kyle, Michael Anne, Emma-Louise Aveling, and Sara J. Singer. “Establishing High Performing Teams: Lessons from Health Care.” Special Issue on Disrup-tion 2020. MIT Sloan Management Review 61, no. 3 (Spring 2020): 14–18.

Kyle, Michael Anne, J. Michael McWilliams, Mary Beth Landrum, Bruce E. Landon, Paul Trompke, Da-vid J. Nyweide, and Michael E. Chernew. “Spending Variation Among ACOs in the Medicare Shared Sav-ings Program.” American Journal of Managed Care 26, no. 4 (April 2020): 170–175.

Kyle, Michael Anne, Lumumba Seegars, John M. Benson, Robert J. Blendon, Robert S. Huckman, and Sara J. Singer. “Toward a Corporate Culture of Health: Results of a National Survey.” Milbank Quar-terly 97, no. 4 (December 2019): 954–977.

Kyle, Michael Anne, Robert J. Blendon, John M. Benson, Melinda K. Abrams, and Eric C. Schnei-der. “Many Medicare Beneficiaries with Serious Ill-ness Report Financial Hardships Despite Cover-age.” Health Affairs 38, no. 11 (November 2019): 1801–1806.

Levine, David, Zoe Co, Lisa Newmark, Alissa Groiss-er, A Jay Holmgren, Jennifer Haas, and David Bates. “Design and Testing of a Mobile Health Application Rating Tool.” Art. 74. npj Digital Medicine 3 (2020).

Marra, Caroline, Jacqueline L. Chen, Andrea Cora-vos, and Ariel D. Stern. “Quantifying the Use of Con-nected Digital Products in Clinical Research.” Digi-tal Medicine 3 (2020).

Pany, Maximilian J.*, Lucy Chen*, Bethany Sheridan, and Robert S. Huckman. “Provider Teams Outper-form Solo Providers.” In Managing Chronic Diseases And Could Improve The Value Of Care.” Health Af-fairs 40, no. 3 (March 1, 2021): 435–44.

Sommers, Benjamin D., Lucy Chen, Robert J. Blen-don, E. John Orav, and Arnold M. Epstein. “Medic-aid Work Requirements In Arkansas: Two-Year Im-pacts On Coverage, Employment, And Affordability Of Care.” Health Affairs 39, no. 9 (September 1, 2020): 1522–30.

ABSTRACT

Marra, Caroline, Jacqueline L. Chen, Andrea Coravos, and Ariel D. Stern. “Quantifying the Use of Connected Digital Products in Clinical Research.” Digital Medicine 3 (2020).

Over recent years, the adoption of connected tech-nologies has grown dramatically, with potential for improving health care delivery, research, and patient experience. Yet, little has been documented about the prevalence and use of connected digital prod-ucts (e.g., products that capture physiological and behavioral metrics) in formal clinical research. Us-ing 18 years of data from ClinicalTrials.gov, we doc-ument substantial growth in the use of connected digital products in clinical trials (~34% CAGR) and show that these products have been used across all phases of research and by a diverse group of trial sponsors. We identify four distinct use cases for how such connected products have been integrated with-in clinical trial design and suggest implications for various stakeholders engaging in clinical research.

*Denotes co-first authorship

RESEARCH, 2021 9

ABSTRACT

Pany, Maximilian J.*, Lucy Chen*, Beth-any Sheridan, and Robert S. Huckman. “Provider Teams Outperform Solo Pro-viders In Managing Chronic Diseases And Could Improve The Value Of Care.” Health Affairs 40, no. 3 (March 1, 2021): 435–44. https: / /doi .org/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01580.

Scope-of-practice regulations, in-cluding prescribing limits and su-

pervision requirements, may influence the propensi-ty of providers to form care teams. Therefore, policy makers need to understand the effect of both team-based care and provider type on clinical outcomes. We examined how care management and biomarker outcomes after the onset of three chronic diseases differed both by team-based versus solo care and by physician versus nonphysician (that is, nurse prac-titioner and physician assistant) care. Using 2013–18 deidentified electronic health record data from US primary care practices, we found that provider teams outperformed solo providers, irrespective of team composition. Among solo providers, physicians and nonphysicians exhibited little meaningful differ-ence in performance. As policy makers contemplate scope-of-practice changes, they should consider the effects of not only provider type but also team-based care on outcomes. Interventions that may encourage provider team formation, including scope-of-practice reforms, may improve the value of care.

MANAGEMENTChristensen, Clayton M., Rory McDonald, Elizabeth J. Altman, and Jonathan E. Palmer. “Disruptive In-novation: An Intellectual History and Directions for Future Research.” Special Issue on Managing in the Age of Disruptions. Journal of Management Studies 55, no. 7 (November 2018): 1043–1078.

Katila, Riitta, Sruthi Thatchenkery, Michael Christensen, and Stefanos A. Zenios. “Is There a Doctor in the House? Expert Product Users, Organizational Roles, and Innova-tion.” Academy of Management Journal 60, no. 6 (De-cember 2017): 2415–2437.

Nonaka, Ikujiro, Ayano Hirose, and Yusaku Takeda. “’Me-so’-Foundations of Dynamic Capabilities: Team-Lev-el Synthesis and Distributed Leadership as the Source of Dynamic Creativity.” Global Strategy Journal 6, no. 3 (August 2016): 168–182.

Takeda, Yusaku. “Enduring Effects of Nationalistic Ideology on Strategy Formation Process: The Case of Nippon Gakki 1938-1960.” Academy of Man-agement Best Paper Proceedings (July 29, 2020).

Yang, Mu-Jeung, Michael Christensen, Nicholas Bloom, Raffaella Sadun, and Jan Rivkin. “How Do CEOs Make Strategy?” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-063, October 2020.

ABSTRACT

Yusaku Takeda. “Escalating Effects of Nationalist Ideology on Corporate Strate-gy: From Yamaha Pianos to Motorcycles, 1945-1960.” (earlier version of this manuscript was published in Academy of

Management Best Paper Proceedings (July 29, 2020).)

I theorize how nationalist ideology sparks unconven-tional managerial discourse about strategies and sets in motion highly idiosyncratic strategy processes and outcomes. Using proprietary archival data, I study the evolution of strategic discourse at Nippon Gakki Ltd, later known as Yamaha Corporation and Yamaha Motor Company. In the 1950s, Nippon Gakki diversi-fied into the motorcycle and other motorized product businesses from its incumbent musical instrument business, driven by an imperative to help Japan re-gain national prestige and prosperity after World War II. I depict a dynamic process in which, over time, nationalist ideology reinforces and fundamentally transforms managerial discourse and perceived stra-tegic priorities. Nationalist ideology initially frames organizational identity and strategic priorities with-in the existing business context, but as nationalism becomes emotionally charged, it obscures the rela-tive significance of the identities tied to the existing businesses, leading to a substantial deviation from prior core businesses. I synthesize these findings to offer an integrated theoretical framework on the ef-fect of nationalist ideology on strategy-making, in-troduce nationalism as a potent ideological force on corporate strategy, and invite research on the link be-tween nationalism and organizations.

ABSTRACT

Yusaku Takeda. “Frame Evolution: Temporal Dynamics of Strategic Frame, Adaptive Strategy and Tech-nology Lifecycle at Fujifilm 1985-2018.” Working Paper.

I theorize how leadership strategic frame evolves and transforms the organization over the lifespan of tech-nology. I depict leaders’ continuous and progressive revisions of their strategic frames as a critical com-ponent of incumbent adaptation to radical techno-logical change. Combining proprietary archival data and extensive interviews, I trace the historical trans-formation of a Japan-based multinational compa-ny Fujifilm over the thirty-three years of the rise and fall of the digital photography industry. As a leading global color film manufacturer, Fujifilm responded

10 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

to evaporating analog and digital photography busi-nesses by diversifying into industrial materials, doc-ument solutions, pharmaceuticals, and even cos-metics industries—resulting in its highest revenue in 2018 (in JPY), in a stark contrast with its former ri-val Eastman Kodak, which filed for Chapter 11 bank-ruptcy protection in 2012. I found four modes of leadership frame-bending—incorporating, expand-ing, shifting, and focusing—during Fujifilm’s trans-formation. This evolutionary process is a progressive escalation of frame-bending across three key dimen-sions—organizational identity, capability definition, and competitive boundary—with varying degrees of malleability in a nested relationship. These findings highlight the critical role of continuous and flexible revisions of strategic frames for incumbent adaption, offer a unified framework to conceptualize different frame dimensions in dynamic relationships, and in-vite research on leadership strategic frame as a dy-namic, rather than static, strategic managerial asset.

ABSTRACT

Yang, Mu-Jeung, Michael Christensen, Nicholas Bloom, Raffaella Sadun, and Jan Rivkin. “How Do CEOs Make Strat-egy?” Harvard Business School Work-ing Paper, No. 21-063, October 2020.

We explore the critical question of how executives make strategic decisions. Utilizing a new survey of 262 CEO alumni of Harvard Business School, we gather evidence on four aspects of each executive’s business strategy: its overall structure, its formaliza-tion, its development, and its implementation. We report three key results. First, different CEOs use markedly different processes to make strategic deci-sions; some follow highly formalized, rigorous, and deliberate processes, while others rely heavily on in-stinct and intuition. Second, more structured strate-gy processes are associated with larger firm size and faster employment growth. Third, using a regression discontinuity centered around a change in the cur-riculum of Harvard Business School’s required strat-egy course, we trace differences in strategic decision making back to differences in managerial education.

MARKETINGBarasz, Kate, and Serena Hagerty. “Hoping for the Worst? A Paradoxical Preference for Bad News.” Journal of Consumer Research (forthcoming).

Chung, Doug J., Byungyeon Kim, and Byoung G. Park. “How Do Sales Efforts Pay Off? Dynamic Pan-el Data Analysis in the Nerlove-Arrow Framework.” Management Science 65, no. 11 (November 2019): 5197–5218.

Chung, Doug J., Byungyeon Kim, and Byoung G. Park. “The Comprehensive Effects of Sales Force Management: A Dynamic Structural Analysis of Se-lection, Compensation, and Training.” Management Science (forthcoming).

Chung, Doug J., Byungyeon Kim, and Byoung Park. “How Do Sales Efforts Pay Off? Dynamic Panel Data Analysis in the Nerlove-Arrow Framework.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 17-108, June 2017. (Revised August 2018.)

Chung, Doug J., Byungyeon Kim, and Niladri B. Syam. “A Practical Approach to Sales Compensa-tion: What Do We Know Now? What Should We Know in the Future?” Foundations and Trends in Marketing 14, no. 1 (2020): 1–52.

Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Lalin Anik, and Dan Ariely. “Consuming Together (versus Separately) Makes the Heart Grow Fonder.” Marketing Letters 30, no. 1 (March 2019): 27–43.

Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Leslie John, Ed O’Brien, and Michael I. Norton. “A Preference for Revision Absent Objective Improvement.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-087, February 2019. (Re-vised April 2020.)

Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Ovul Sezer, and Michael I. Norton. “Rituals and Nuptials: The Emotional and Relational Consequences of Relationship Rituals.” Journal of the Association for Consumer Research 4, no. 2 (April 2019): 185–197.

Hagerty, Serena, and Kate Barasz. “Inequality in So-cially Permissible Consumption.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 25 (June 23, 2020): 14084–14093.

Mann, Heather E., Ximena Garcia-Rada, Daniel Houser, and Dan Ariely.”Everybody Else Is Doing It: Exploring Social Transmission of Lying Behavior.” PLoS ONE 9, no. 10 (October 2014).

Mann, Heather E., Ximena Garcia-Rada, Lars Hor-nuf, Juan Tafurt, and Dan Ariely.”Cut from the Same Cloth: Similarly Dishonest Individuals Across Coun-tries.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 47, no. 6 (July 2016): 858–874.

Mohan, Bhavya, Serena Hagerty, and Michael Nor-ton. “Consumers Punish Firms that Cut Employee Pay in Response to COVID-19.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-020, August 2020.

Whitley, Sarah, Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Fleura Bardhi, Dan Ariely, and Carey Morewedge. “Relational Spend-ing in Funerals: Caring for Others Loved and Lost” (March 21, 2021). Journal of Consumer Psychology (forthcoming).

RESEARCH, 2021 11

ABSTRACT

Barasz, Kate, and Serena Hagerty. “Hoping for the Worst? A Paradoxical Preference for Bad News.” Journal of Consumer Research (forthcoming).

Nine studies investigate when and why people may paradoxically prefer bad news—e.g., hoping for an objectively worse injury or a higher-risk diagnosis over explicitly better alternatives. Using a combination of field surveys and randomized exper-iments, the research demonstrates that people may hope for relatively worse (versus better) news in an ef-fort to preemptively avoid subjectively difficult deci-sions (Studies 1–2). This is because when worse news avoids a choice (Study 3A)—e.g., by “forcing one’s hand” or creating one dominant option that circum-vents a fraught decision (Study 3B)—it can relieve the decision-maker’s experience of personal respon-sibility (Study 3C). However, because not all decisions warrant avoidance, not all decisions will elicit a pref-erence for worse news; fewer people hope for worse news when facing subjectively easier (versus harder) choices (Studies 4A¬–B). Finally, this preference for worse news is not without consequence and may cre-ate perverse incentives for decision-makers, such as the tendency to forgo opportunities for improvement (Studies 5A–B). The work contributes to the literature on decision avoidance and elucidates another strate-gy people use to circumvent difficult decisions: a pro-pensity to hope for the worst.

ABSTRACT

Chung, Doug J., Byungyeon Kim, and Byoung G. Park. “The Comprehensive Effects of Sales Force Management: A Dynamic Structural Analysis of Selec-tion, Compensation, and Training.”

Management Science (forthcoming).

Nine studies investigate when and why people may paradoxically prefer bad news—e.g., hoping for an objectively worse injury or a higher-risk diagnosis over explicitly better alternatives. Using a combina-tion of field surveys and randomized experiments, the research demonstrates that people may hope for relatively worse (versus better) news in an effort to preemptively avoid subjectively difficult decisions (Studies 1–2). This is because when worse news avoids a choice (Study 3A)—e.g., by “forcing one’s hand” or creating one dominant option that circum-vents a fraught decision (Study 3B)—it can relieve the decision-maker’s experience of personal respon-sibility (Study 3C). However, because not all deci-sions warrant avoidance, not all decisions will elicit a preference for worse news; fewer people hope for worse news when facing subjectively easier (versus harder) choices (Studies 4A¬–B). Finally, this prefer-ence for worse news is not without consequence and

may create perverse incentives for decision-makers, such as the tendency to forgo opportunities for im-provement (Studies 5A–B). The work contributes to the literature on decision avoidance and elucidates another strategy people use to circumvent difficult decisions: a propensity to hope for the worst.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIORBernstein, Ethan, and Hayley Blunden. “The Sales Director Who Turned Work into a Fantasy Sports Competition.” Harvard Business Review (website) (March 27, 2015).

Bernstein, Ethan, Hayley Blunden, Andrew Brodsky, Wonbin Sohn, and Ben Waber. “The Implications of Working Without an Office.” Special Issue on The New Reality of WFH. Harvard Business Review: The Big Idea (July 2020).

Blunden, Hayley, Alison Wood Brooks, Leslie John, and Francesca Gino. “Seeker Beware: The Relational Costs of Ignoring Advice.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 17-102, May 2017.

Blunden, Hayley, and Andrew Brodsky. “Beyond the Emoticon: Are There Unintentional Cues of Emotion in Email?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 47, No. 4 (April 2021).

Blunden, Hayley, and Francesca Gino. “How the Other Half Thinks: The Psychology of Advising.” Chapter 3 in The Oxford Handbook of Advice, edit-ed by E.L. MacGeorge and L.M. Van Swol. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Blunden, Hayley, Jennifer M. Logg, Alison Wood Brooks, Leslie John, and Francesca Gino. “How Ask-ing Multiple People for Advice Can Backfire.” Har-vard Business Review (website) (May 10, 2019).

Blunden, Hayley, Jennifer M. Logg, Alison Wood Brooks, Leslie John, and Francesca Gino. “Seek-er Beware: The Interpersonal Costs of Ignoring Ad-vice.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 150 (January 2019): 83–100.

Brooks, Alison Wood, Karen Huang, Nicole Abi-Esber, Ryan W. Buell, Laura Huang, and Brian Hall. “Mitigat-ing Malicious Envy: Why Successful Individuals Should Reveal Their Failures.” Journal of Experimental Psy-chology: General 148, no. 4 (April 2019): 667–687.

Collins, Hanne K., Ashley V. Whillans, and Leslie K. John. “Joy and Rigor in Behavioral Science.” Harvard Busi-ness School Working Paper, No. 20-090, February 2020.

Cooney, Gus, Adam M. Mastroianni, Nicole Abi-Esber, and Alison Wood Brooks. “The Many Minds Problem: Disclosure in Dyadic vs. Group Conversation.” Special Issue on Privacy and Disclosure, Online and in Social Interactions edited by Leslie K. John, Diana Tamir, and Michael Slepian. Current Opinion in Psychology 31 (February 2020): 22–27.

12 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

Kristal, Ariella S., Ashley V. Whillans, Max Bazer-man, Francesca Gino, Lisa Shu, Nina Mazar, and Dan Ariely. “When We’re Wrong, It’s Our Responsi-bility as Scientists to Say So.” Scientific American (March 21, 2020).

Kristal, Ariella, and Ashley V. Whillans. “Why It’s So Hard to Change People’s Commuting Behav-ior.” Harvard Business Review (website) (Decem-ber 24, 2019).

Kyle, Michael Anne, Lumumba Seegars, John M. Benson, Robert J. Blendon, Robert S. Huckman, and Sara J. Singer. “Toward a Corporate Culture of Health: Results of a National Survey.” Milbank Quarterly 97, no. 4 (December 2019): 954–977.

Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., and Elizabeth R. Johnson. “Backlash against male elementary educators.” Jour-nal of Applied Social Psychology 46, no. 7 (July 2016): 379–393.

Sarnecka, Dominika K., and Gary P. Pisano. “The Evolutionary Nature of Breakthrough Innovation: Re-Evaluating the Exploration vs. Exploitation Di-chotomy.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-071, December 2020.

Saxena, Nripsuta, Karen Huang, Evan DeFilippis, Goran Radanovic, David C. Parkes, and Yang Liu. “How Do Fairness Definitions Fare? Examining Pub-lic Attitudes Towards Algorithmic Definitions of Fair-ness.” Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, and Society (2019).

Seegars, Lumumba Babushe, and Lakshmi Ramara-jan. “Blacks Leading Whites: How Mutual and Dual (Ingroup and Outgroup) Identification Affect In-equality.” Chap. 19 in Race, Work, and Leadership: New Perspectives on the Black Experience, edited by Laura Morgan Roberts, Anthony J. Mayo, and Da-vid A. Thomas. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Re-view Press, 2019.

Seegars, Lumumba Babushe, and Patricia Faison Hewlin. “Conformity.” In Encyclopedia of Personal-ity and Individual Differences, edited by Virgil Zei-gler-Hill and Todd K. Shackelford, 831–836. Spring-er, 2020.

Ward, George, Hanne Collins, Michael I. Norton, and Ashley V. Whillans. “Work Values Shape the Rela-tionship Between Stress and (Un)Happiness.” Har-vard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-044, September 2020.

Ward-Griffin, Emma, Patrick Klaiber, Hanne Collins, Rhea L. Owens, Stanley Coren, and Frances S. Chen. “Petting Away Pre-exam Stress: The Effect of Ther-apy Dog Sessions on Student Well-being.” Stress & Health 34, no. 3 (August 2018): 468–473.

Cormier, Grace, and Jon M. Jachimowicz. “Quiet Fires Fail to Impress: Introverted Expressions of Pas-sion Receive Less Social Worth.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-027, August 2020.

DeFilippis, Evan, Stephen Michael Impink, Madi-son Singell, Jeffrey T. Polzer, and Raffaella Sadun. “Collaborating During Coronavirus: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Nature of Work.” Harvard Busi-ness School Working Paper, No. 21-006, July 2020.

Hofer, Marlise, Hanne Collins, Ashley V. Whillans, and Frances Chen. “Olfactory Cues from Romantic Partners and Strangers Moderate Women’s Responses to Stress.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 114, no. 1 (January 2018): 1–9.

Hofer, Marlise, Hanne Collins, Gita D. Mishra, and Mark Schaller. “Do Post-menopausal Women Pro-vide More Care to Their Kin?: Evidence of Grandpar-ental Caregiving from Two Large-scale National Sur-veys.” Evolution and Human Behavior 40, no. 4 (July 2019): 355–364.

John, Leslie K., Hayley Blunden, Katherine L. Milk-man, Luca Foschini, Francesca Gino, and Bradford Tuckfield. “On the Failure to Seek Beneficial Infor-mation: The Problem with Inconspicuous Incen-tives.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 16-090, February 2016. (Revised January 2020.)

John, Leslie, Hayley Blunden, and Heidi Liu. “Re-search Confirms: When Receiving Bad News, We Shoot the Messenger.” Harvard Business Review (website) (April 16, 2019).

John, Leslie, Hayley Blunden, and Heidi Liu. “Shoot-ing the Messenger.” Journal of Experimental Psy-chology: General 148, no. 4 (April 2019): 644–666.

Kappmeier, Mariska, Bushra Guenoun, and Rema-ya Campbell. “They Are Us? The Mediating Effects of Compatibility-based Trust on the Relationship Be-tween Discrimination and Overall Trust.” New Zealand Journal of Psychology 48, no. 1 (2019): 97–105.

Kristal, Ariella S., and Ashley V. Whillans. “What We Can Learn from Five Naturalistic Field Experiments That Failed to Shift Commuter Behaviour.” Nature Hu-man Behaviour 4, no. 2 (February 2020): 169–176.

Kristal, Ariella S., and Laurie R. Santos. “G.I. Joe Phenomena: Understanding the Limits of Metacog-nitive Awareness on Debiasing.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-084, January 2021.

Kristal, Ariella S., Ashley V. Whillans, Max Bazer-man, Francesca Gino, Lisa Shu, Nina Mazar, and Dan Ariely. “Signing at the Beginning vs at the End Does Not Decrease Dishonesty.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 13 (March 31, 2020).

RESEARCH, 2021 13

ABSTRACT

Blunden, Hayley, and Andrew Brodsky. “Beyond the Emoticon: Are There Un-intentional Cues of Emotion in Email?” Personality and Social Psychology Bul-letin 47, No. 4 (April 2021).

Email and text-based communication have become ubiquitous. Although recent findings indicate emo-tional equivalence between face-to-face and email communication, there is limited evidence of non-verbal behaviors in text-based communication, es-pecially the kinds of unintentional displays central to emotion perception in face-to-face interactions. We investigate whether unintentional emotion cues occur in text-based communication by proposing that communication mistakes (e.g., typos) influence emotion perception. Across six studies, we show that communication errors amplify perceptions of email sender’s emotions—both negative (Studies 1A–2, 4, 5) and positive (Study 3). Furthermore, by con-trasting perceptions of message senders who make mistakes in emotional versus unemotional contexts (Study 5), we show that people partially excuse message sender communication errors in emotion-al (versus unemotional) contexts, attributing such mistakes to the sender’s emotional state rather than solely their intelligence level. These studies suggest that nonverbal behavior in text-based and face-to-face communication may be more comparable than previously thought.

ABSTRACT

DeFilippis, Evan, Stephen Michael Impink, Madison Singell, Jeffrey T. Polzer, and Raffaella Sadun. “Col-laborating During Coronavirus: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Nature

of Work.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-006, July 2020.

People often feel malicious envy, a destructive inter-We explore the impact of COVID-19 on employee’s digital communication patterns through an event study of lockdowns in 16 large metropolitan areas in North America, Europe and the Middle East. Us-ing de-identified, aggregated meeting and email me-ta-data from 3,143,270 users, we find, compared to pre-pandemic levels, increases in the number of meetings per person (+12.9 percent) and the num-ber of attendees per meeting (+13.5 percent), but decreases in the average length of meetings (-20.1 percent). Collectively, the net effect is that people spent less time in meetings per day (-11.5 percent) in the post-lockdown period. We also find significant and durable increases in length of the average work-day (+8.2 percent, or +48.5 minutes), along with short-term increases in email activity. These findings provide insight from a novel dataset into how the na-

Whillans, Ashley V., Leslie Perlow, and Aurora Turek. “Experimenting During the Shift to Virtual Team Work: Learnings from How Teams Adapted Their Ac-tivities During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Informa-tion and Organization 31, no. 1 (March 2021).

Whillans, Ashley V., Ryan Dwyer, Jaewon Yoon, and Allan Schweyer. “From Dollars to Sense: Placing a Monetary Value on Non-Cash Compensation Encour-ages Employees to Value Time over Money.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 18-059, Janu-ary 2018. (Updated January 2019.)

Williams, Allison L., Acacia C. Parks, Grace Cormier, Julia Stafford, and Ashley V. Whillans. “Improving Re-silience Among Employees High in Depression, Anxi-ety, and Workplace Distress.” International Journal of Human Resource Management (forthcoming).

Yeomans, Michael, Julia Minson, Hanne Collins, Frances S. Chen, and Francesca Gino. “Conversational Receptiveness: Expressing Engagement with Opposing Views.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 160 (September 2020): 131–148.

Yoon, Jaewon, Ashley V. Whillans, and Ed O’Brien. “Connecting the Dots: Superordinate Framing Enhanc-es the Value of Unimportant Tasks.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-011, July 2019.

Yoon, Jaewon, Ashley V. Whillans, and Ed O’Brien. “How to Make Even the Most Mundane Tasks More Motivating.” Harvard Business Review (website) (July 24, 2019).

Yoon, Jaewon, Ashley V. Whillans and Grant Donnel-ly. “Why We Don’t Ask for More Time on Deadlines (But Probably Should).” Harvard Business Review (website) (April 4, 2019).

Yoon, Jaewon, Grant Donnelly, and Ashley V. Whill-ans. “It Doesn’t Hurt to Ask (for More Time): Em-ployees Often Overestimate the Interpersonal Costs of Extension Requests.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-064, January 2019. (Re-vised August 2019.)

Yoon, Jaewon, Hayley Blunden, Ariella Kristal, and Ashley V. Whillans. “Framing Feedback Giving as Ad-vice Giving Yields More Critical and Actionable In-put.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-021, August 2019.

Yoon, Jaewon, Hayley Blunden, Ariella Kristal, and Ashley V. Whillans. “Why Asking for Advice Is More Effective Than Asking for Feedback.” Harvard Busi-ness Review Digital Articles (September 20, 2019).

14 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

ture of work has changed for a large sample of knowl-edge workers. We discuss these changes in light of the ongoing challenges faced by organizations and workers struggling to adapt and perform in the face of a global pandemic.

ABSTRACT

Kristal, Ariella S., and Ashley V. Whill-ans. “What We Can Learn from Five Naturalistic Field Experiments That Failed to Shift Commuter Behaviour.” Nature Human Behaviour 4, no. 2

(February 2020): 169–176.

Across five field experiments with employees of a large organization (n = 68,915), we examined whether stan-dard behavioural interventions (‘nudges’) successfully reduced single-occupancy vehicle commutes. In Stud-ies 1 and 2, we sent letters and emails with nudges designed to increase carpooling. These interventions failed to increase carpool sign-up or usage. In Stud-ies 3a and 4, we examined the efficacy of other well-es-tablished behavioural interventions: non-cash incen-tives and personalized travel plans. Again, we found no positive effect of these interventions. Across studies, effect sizes ranged from Cohen’s d = −0.01 to d = 0.05. Equivalence testing, using study-specific smallest ef-fect sizes of interest, revealed that the treatment ef-fects observed in four out of five of our experiments were statistically equivalent to zero (P < 0.04). The failure of these well-powered experiments designed to nudge commuting behaviour highlights both the dif-ficulty of changing commuter behaviour and the im-portance of publishing null results to build cumulative knowledge about how to encourage sustainable travel.

ABSTRACT

Whillans, Ashley V., Leslie Perlow, and Aurora Turek. “Experimenting During the Shift to Virtual Team Work: Learnings from How Teams Adapted Their Activities During the

COVID-19 Pandemic.” Information and Organiza-tion 31, no. 1 (March 2021).

Past research has focused on understanding the characteristics of work that are fully virtual or ful-ly collocated. The present study seeks to expand our understanding of team work by studying knowledge workers’ experiences as they were suddenly forced to transition to a fully virtual environment. During the height of the US lockdown from April to June 2020, we interviewed 51 knowledge workers employed on teams at the same professional services firm. Draw-ing from in situ reflections about teams’ lived expe-riences, this paper explores how the shift to virtu-al work brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic illu-minated the fundamental activities that team work

requires, facilitated and undermined the perfor-mance of team activities, and prompted employees to adapt and reflect on their use of digital technology to perform these activities. Using the shift to virtual work as a unique learning opportunity, our findings demonstrate that team work entails several core ac-tivities (task, process, and relationship interactions) that require additional adjustments to successful-ly enact in the virtual (vs. collocated) environment.

STRATEGYHou, Young. “Vertical Coopetition between Firms: In-centives and Impact.” Working Paper, 2021.

Hou, Young, and Christopher W. Poliquin. “CEO Ac-tivism, Consumer Polarization, and Firm Perfor-mance.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-106, February 2021.

Hou, Young, and Dennis Yao. “Pushed into a Crowd: Repositioning Costs, Resources, and Competition in the RTE Cereal Industry.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-014, August 2019. (Revised May 2020.)

Wright, Nataliya Langburd, Frank Nagle, and Shane Greenstein. “Open Source Software and Global Entre-preneurship.” Harvard Business School Working Pa-per, No. 20-139, June 2020. (Revised July 2020.)

Wright, Nataliya Langburd, Rembrand Koning, and Tarun Khanna. “Judging Foreign Startups.” Har-vard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-097, March 2021.

ABSTRACT

Hou, Young, and Christopher W. Poliquin. “CEO Activism, Consumer Polarization, and Firm Performance.” Harvard Business School Working Pa-per, No. 21-106, February 2021.

CEOs are increasingly engaging in activism on con-troversial social and political issues that do not di-rectly affect their businesses. Simultaneously, the general public is increasingly polarized. We exam-ine how CEO support for gun control after two mass shootings affects firm performance and polarizes consumers. Using mobile phone location data to measure store-level visits, we study (a) the net ef-fect of activism on store performance, (b) the poten-tial for polarization to create asymmetry in the activ-ism’s effects on consumers, and (c) the persistence of those performance effects. We find that activism has small net effects on sales, polarizes consumers, has asymmetric effects across liberals and conser-vatives, and quickly dissipates. Our results highlight the strategic implications for executives pressured to take stances on controversial issues.

RESEARCH, 2021 15

TECHNOLOGY & OPERATIONS MANAGEMENTAllen, Ryan, and Prithwiraj Choudhury. “Algo-rithm-Augmented Work Performance and Domain Experience: The Countervailing Forces of Ability and Aversion.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-073, October 2020.

Buell, Ryan W., and MoonSoo Choi. “Improving Cus-tomer Compatibility with Tradeoff Transparency.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-013, July 2019. (Revised January 2021.)

Chauvin, Jasmina, Prithwiraj Choudhury, and Tommy Pan Fang. “The Effects of Temporal Distance on In-tra-Firm Communication: Evidence from Daylight Sav-ings Time.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-052, September 2020.

Choi, MoonSoo, Qi Fu, and Ward Whitt. “Using Sim-ulation to Improve the Pace of Play.” International Journal of Golf Science 6, no. 2 (2017): 85–117.

Choudhury, Prithwiraj, Ryan Allen, and Michael G. Endres. “Machine Learning for Pattern Discovery in Management Research.” Strategic Management Journal 42, no. 1 (January 2021): 30–57.

Clough, David R., Tommy Pan Fang, Balagopal Vis-sa, and Andy Wu. “Turning Lead into Gold: How Do Entrepreneurs Mobilize Resources to Exploit Oppor-tunities?” Academy of Management Annals 13, no. 1 (2019): 240–271.

Fang, Tommy Pan, Andy Wu, and David R. Clough. “Platform Diffusion at Temporary Gatherings: Social Coordination and Ecosystem Emergence.” Art. 1. Strategic Management Journal 42, no. 2 (February 2021): 233–272. (Lead article.)

Ferreira, Kris J., Joel Goh, and Ehsan Valavi. “Inter-mediation in the Supply of Agricultural Products in Developing Economies.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 18-033, October 2017.

Flammer, Caroline, Michael W. Toffel, and Kala Viswanathan. “Shareholder Activism and Firms’ Vol-untary Disclosure of Climate Change Risks.” Strate-gic Management Journal (forthcoming).

Ghosh, Sourobh, and Andy Wu. “Iterative Coordi-nation and Innovation.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-121, January 2020.

Ghosh, Sourobh, Stefan Thomke, and Hazjier Pour-khalkhali. “The Effects of Hierarchy on Learning and Performance in Business Experimentation.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-081, Feb-ruary 2020.

Greenstein, Shane, and Tommy Pan Fang. “Where the Cloud Rests: The Economic Geography of Data Centers.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-042, September 2020.

Kwon, Caleb, and Andrew Di Wu. “Disclosure-Driv-en Social Engagement in Supply Chains.” Working Paper, February 2021.

Kwon, Caleb, and Eric Mbakop. “Estimation of the Number of Components in Nonparametric Multi-variate Finite Mixture Models.” Annals of Statistics (forthcoming).

Kwon, Caleb. “Supply Chain Disruptions and Causal Outcomes: Evidence from the Bankruptcy of Hanjin Shipping.” Working Paper, December 2018.

McDonald, Rory, and Ryan T. Allen. “A Spanner in the Works: Category-Spanning Entrants and Audience Valu-ation of Incumbents.” Strategy Science (forthcoming).

Palmarozzo, Ashley, Jodi L. Short, and Michael W. Toffel. “Auditor Independence and Outsourcing: Aligning Incentives to Mitigate Shilling and Shirk-ing.” Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-078, January 2021.

Valavi, Ehsan, Joel Hestness, Marco Iansiti, New-sha Ardalani, Feng Zhu, and Karim R. Lakhani. “Time Dependency, Data Flow, and Competitive Ad-vantage.” Harvard Business School Working Paper.

Valavi, Ehsan, Joel Hestness, Newsha Ardalani, and Marco Iansiti. “Time and the Value of Data.” Har-vard Business School Working Paper, No. 21-016, August 2020.

Zhu, Feng, Xinxin Li, Ehsan Valavi, and Marco Iansiti. “Network Interconnectivity and Entry into Platform Mar-kets.” Information Systems Research (forthcoming).

16 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

FACULTY & ALUMNI COLLABORATORSDoctoral students work with faculty and alunni across the community to author and co-author publications.

HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL FACULTY

Doug J. Chung collaborated with

Byungyeon Kim............................page 10, 11

Shawn Cole Fanele Mashwama.........................................4

Zoë Cullen Yin Wei Soon................................................4

Leemore S. Dafny Karen Shen..............................................4, 5

Yin Wei Soon................................................4

Marco Di Maggio Angela Ma....................................................4

Amy C. Edmondson Olivia Jung...................................................8

Mark Egan Hanbin Yang................................................4

Shane Greenstein Nataliya Langburd Wright.............................14

Tommy Pan Fang........................................15

Ran Zhuo.................................................5, 6

Samuel G. Hanson Michael Blank..............................................4

Robert S. Huckman Lucy Chen...............................................8, 9

A Jay Holmgren............................................7

Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

Maximilian J. Pany....................................8, 9

Lumumba Seegars......................................12

Leslie John Nicole Abi-Esber.........................................11

Hayley Blunden....................................11, 12

Hanne K. Collins.........................................11

Ximena Garcia-Rada....................................10

Karim R. Lakhani Patrick J. Ferguson.......................................3

Olivia S. Jung.......................................6, 7, 8

Ehsan Valavi...............................................15

Josh Lerner Fanele Mashwama........................................4

Michael Luca Erica Moszkowski..........................................4

Alexander J. MacKay Hanbin Yang................................................4

Rory McDonald Jonathan E. Palmer.......................................9

Ryan T. Allen..............................................15

Frank Nagle Nataliya Langburd Wright.............................14

Michael I. Norton Hanne Collins.............................................12

Ximena Garcia-Rada....................................10

Serena Hagerty...........................................10

Jan Rivkin Michael Christensen...............................9, 10

Raffaella Sadun Michael Christensen...............................9, 10

Evan DeFilippis....................................12, 13

Anywhere Sikochi Liran Eliner..................................................3

Suraj Srinivasan

Wilbur Chen.................................................3

Liran Eliner..................................................2

Eugene F. Soltes Alexandra Scherf..........................................3

Christopher T. Stanton

Yin Wei Soon................................................4

Ariel D. Stern Samuel Lite.................................................5

Caroline Marra..............................................8

Adi Sunderam

Michael Blank..............................................4

RESEARCH, 2021 17

Charles C.Y. Wang Trang T. Nguyen............................................3

Emily Williams Angela Ma...................................................4

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS

Emma-Louise Aveling collaborated with Michael Anne Kyle................................page 8

David W. Bates A Jay Holmgren........................................7, 8

Robert J. Blendon Lucy Chen....................................................8

Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

Lumumba Seegars......................................12

Allan M. Brandt A Jay Holmgren............................................7

Michael E. Chernew Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

Zoe Co A Jay Holmgren........................................7, 8

David Cutler A Jay Holmgren............................................7

Arnold M. Epstein Lucy Chen...................................................8

Richard G. Frank Lucy Chen...................................................7

Edward L. Glaeser Erica Moszkowski..........................................4

William J. Gordon Samuel Lite.................................................5

Howell E. Jackson Talia B Gillis.................................................4

Haiden A. Huskamp Lucy Chen...................................................7

Bruce E. Landon Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

Mary Beth Landrum Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

J. Michael McWilliams Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

Lisa Newmark A Jay Holmgren.........................................7,8

E. John Orav Lucy Chen...................................................8

Eric C. Schneider Michael Anne Kyle........................................8

Andrei Shleifer Spencer Yongwook Kwon................................4

Joshua Simons Talia B. Gillis................................................4

Benjamin D. Sommers Lucy Chen...............................................7, 8

Jeremy C. Stein Michael Blank..............................................x

DOCTORAL ALUMNI

Julia Adler-Milstein collaborated with A Jay Holmgren................................page 6, 7

Elizabeth J. Altman Jonathan E. Palmer.......................................9

Lalin Anik Ximena Garcia-Rada....................................10

Kate Barasz Serena Hagerty.....................................10, 11

Henry Eyring Patrick J. Ferguson.......................................x

Andrew Lilley Matthew Lilley..............................................4

Gianluca Rinaldi...........................................4

Carolin Pflueger Gianluca Rinaldi...........................................5

Bethany Sheridan Lucy Chen...............................................8, 9

Maximilian J. Pany....................................8, 9

Sara J. Singer Michael Anne Kyle....................................7, 8

18 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL

DOCTORAL PROGRAMS

WYSS HOUSE

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02163

WWW.HBS.EDU / DOCTORAL