Co-workers trust and intense competition

A competitive market encourages trust among co-workers, new study

Published: 15:18, September 20, 2018

Co-workers in a competitive market trust each other more than those in a non-competitive market, a new study found. In other words, working in a competitive industry generates a greater level of trust among workers in the same company. This is what researchers from Aix-Marseille University, Princeton University, and the University of British Columbia found.

They wrote about their study and findings in the journal Science Advances (citation below).

The researchers gathered and analyzed data from both Germany and the US across several manufacturing industries. They suggest that the more competitive an industry is, the more pro-social the behaviors of co-workers are. Sharing, volunteering, and cooperation, for example, are pro-social behaviors.

Trust among co-workers in competitive markets

Co-author Patrick Francois said:

“In competitive markets, employers unable to elicit such cooperative behavior are likely to be out-competed by those that are more successful in doing so. Pro-social behavior from employees makes them more productive, which is good for business.”

Francois is a Professor at the Vancouver School of Economics at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Canada. He is also a Senior Fellow of the Institutions, Organizations, and Growth program of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research.

The other two co-authors were Thomas Fujiwara and Tanguy van Ypsersele. Thomas Fujiwara is an Assistant Professor of Economics at Princeton University’s Department of Economics in the US. Tanguy van Ypersele is a Professor at Aix-Marseille University’s Faculty of Economics and Management in France.

Co-workers trust each other more when markets are competitive
In the journal article, the authors wrote: “Increased competition across firms exposes subjects to increased group beneficial behavior on the part of their co-workers and increases their own such behavior.” (Image: economics.ubc.ca)

Laboratory experiment

The researchers carried out a laboratory experiment which replicated industry data in a controlled environment. Participants had to play a public goods game, which is a standard of experimental economics.

In this game, participants decide secretly whether to make a financial contribution to a collective pool. If they don’t give the money, they keep it for themselves.

The study participants had to play the game twice. The first time, they played it in the traditional way. When they played the second time, on the other hand, the researchers manipulated the degree of competition across the groups.

The researchers wanted the experiment to mimic what happens in real life. In other words, they wanted the variation of competition that exists in the marketplace. In this context, the term ‘marketplace’ means the same as ‘market’ in the abstract sense of the word.

Therefore, study participants might be co-workers in more competitive or less competitive markets.

There was more pro-social behavior in the participants who played in the more competitive version of the game. In other words, in this simulation, pretend co-workers in a competitive industry had more pro-social behaviors than their counterparts in a less competitive industry.

What they saw in the experiment matched what they had observed in the German and US data.

The authors said that we still have a poor understanding of the origins of pro-social behavior among humans. However, they point to competition across companies as a potential factor supporting cultural evolution.

Citation

“The origins of human prosociality: Cultural group selection in the workplace and the laboratory,” Patrick Francois, Thomas Fujiwara, and Tanguy van Ypersele. Science Advances, 19 Sep 2018: Vol. 4, no. 9, eaat2201.
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat2201.

Christian Nordqvist Avatar

Other News

New process could reduce the need to purify factory carbon dioxide before reuse

Aug 4, 2026

More novel drugs gained revenue faster in the U.S. after 2013

Aug 3, 2026

Why the right decade matters: new research could help advertisers use nostalgia more effectively

Aug 3, 2026

Could flexible working unlock a new generation of women leaders in family businesses?

Aug 3, 2026

Can waste become the world’s next fire-resistant building material?

Aug 3, 2026

Public R&D spending can boost the economy before the money is even spent, study finds

Aug 2, 2026

Boehringer Ingelheim’s Mexico City expansion targets 5 billion tablets a year

Aug 2, 2026

Why more accurate AI forecasts don’t always make better investment decisions

Aug 1, 2026

The AI boom is inheriting the geography of America’s old energy economy

Jul 31, 2026

Brands scale AI investment as consumers place greater value on reliability, survey finds

Jul 30, 2026

Customers may praise products they helped create even when they fail

Jul 30, 2026

Study links Uber and Lyft to higher local GDP, but overall job effects remain unclear

Jul 30, 2026

Why some industrial parks create thousands of jobs while others create almost none

Jul 29, 2026

Solar farms meet farming as AI robots work beneath the panels

Jul 28, 2026

Simple chemical treatment could make recycled car plastic almost as strong as new

Jul 28, 2026

Leaf spray could give farmers another tool against salty soil

Jul 28, 2026

Product recalls were linked to lower reported tax rates near year-end

Jul 27, 2026

Land degradation is linked to billions in lost farm output

Jul 26, 2026

Chile’s mining disruption exposes a hidden risk in the AI supply chain

Jul 26, 2026

Bad customer matching can make a profitable ad campaign look like a failure

Jul 26, 2026