posted on 2009-08-01, 00:00authored byTimothy C. Salmon, Roberto A. Weber
Efficient growth often requires the integration of individuals from lower-performing
groups, firms, or societies into higher-performing ones. Such integration may be difficult without facilitating interventions or restrictions. We explore, using a laboratory
experiment, the effectiveness of two regularly-employed entry restrictions: entry quotas and entry exams. We use a coordination game with Pareto-ranked equilibria, in
which we allow an efficiently-coordinated group and an inefficiently-coordinated one to
arise endogenously. We then allow individuals to move from the low-performing group
to the better one. We vary whether such movement is unrestricted, is limited to one
entrant per period, or is subject to passing an entry exam. We find both kinds of restrictions improve the efficient integration of entrants, but that there is no additional
benefit obtained by their combination. The restrictions lead both to improved behavior
among entrants and to the maintenance of good behavior among incumbents in the
high-performing group.