In Simple Words
Imagine a race where runners only sprint at full speed if they know the trophy goes strictly to the fastest runner rather than the referee's friend; establishing objective, performance-based advancement rules motivates workers to increase their daily operational effort in anticipation of future promotion rewards.
Community health workers in Sierra Leone
- Manager-led promotions
- Comparison group
- Promotions based on performance
- 22% more household visits
Measured ten months after the change, covering visits in the previous six months. Households reported visits; this does not measure better health outcomes.
See source →Research question
Public sector organizations frequently fail to link promotions to objective performance, relying instead on seniority or discretionary systems prone to patronage and favoritism, which demotivates frontline personnel.
Participants
N = 2,009 Community Health Workers (CHWs) and 372 Peer Supervisors across 372 Peripheral Health Units in Sierra Leone, evaluated via random household surveys of primary female caregivers.
Study Design
Field experiment / Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT), cross-randomizing promotion rules (objective performance-based measuring household visit quantity and length vs. discretionary status quo) over a 10-month evaluation period.
Results
Transitioning to a meritocratic promotion system increased the average number of household visits provided per worker by 22% (+1.497 visits; p < 0.01) and increased average visit length by 15% without compromising service quality or household targeting.
Takeaway
Transition public sector personnel promotion criteria from discretionary manager nominations to objective, independently verified worker performance metrics.
Source and citation
See source →Read alongside the research
Plain-English glossary
Original explanations, informed by the references below. Examples are illustrations, not data from the studies above. The research text stays unchanged.
- Randomized controlled trial
A study that uses chance, like drawing lots, to decide who receives each option being compared. Researchers compare the groups’ outcomes to estimate the effect of those options.
ExampleA lottery assigns volunteers to a training programme or a comparison group. Researchers then compare their outcomes.
GET-IT glossary · Randomized study ↗Read more about randomized controlled trial →