報酬不確定性對工作選擇的影響

大部分的華人總是將求學視為一生最重要的事情，其目的為謀得一份待遇優渥的工作，卻常常忽略了每個人所擁有的天賦。一般而言，多數人在選擇工作時，也以淨報酬來衡量優劣，忽略了心中自我實現的需要，從而放棄自己天賦所適合的工作。究竟除了工作薪資外，是否還存在其他的因素，影響著人們對於工作的選擇？若能使大部分人選擇適合自己天賦的工作，不論是對於社會整體的產出，亦或是個人的自我實現效用，也許都能有所提升。本論文建立一個包含跨期消費、人力資本投資與跨代移轉的工作選擇模型，以探討個人的工作選擇背離天賦的原因。模型中，我們將工作分為所得確定與所得不確定兩種類型。其中，在所得不確定的模型，個體在第一期除了消費外也可進行人力資本投資，以提高第二期獲取高薪的機率與工作能力；而所得確定的工作則無人力資本投資之必要。兩類工作的效用來源均從消費、財富移轉與自我實現獲得。個體之天賦和兩類型工作所需的能力均有所差異。如果個體從事能力適合的工作，自我實現將帶來正效用。反之，當自身能力與工作所需的能力有差距時，將會降低自我實現產生的正效用。本研究對於不同天賦的決策者，歸納出幾項影響工作選擇的因素。個人賦予消費效用 (與自我實現) 的主觀價值，以及生存所需的基本消費之客觀水準，都深刻地影響工作選擇。首先，無論天賦為何，只要降低 (提高) 對於消費 (自我實現) 的重視程度，都可避免工作的錯置。其次，當各期的基本消費升高時，同期的薪資必須增加至一定水準，方可確保個人選擇的工作與天賦相符。第三，對於天賦適合所得不確定之個體，若未來的基本消費增加，則第二期高薪資提高對工作錯置並無扭轉效果，反而是第二期低薪資增加，可減少工作錯置的可能性。最後，對於所得不確定的工作而言，降低風險或是提高平均薪資，可誘使個體從事與天賦相符的工作。有文獻指出實施無條件基本所得措施後，人們更願意選擇或更換其適合的工作；尤其是適合風險性工作者。但根據本研究的模擬分析結果，此措施只對部分適合無風險工作者有明顯的保障效果。而政府補助未來的基本消費所需，對於適合風險性工作者，反而有降低其工作錯置的可能。

關鍵字

工作選擇；工作錯置；報酬不確定

並列摘要

Most of the Chinese people have always regarded education as one of the most important things in life, as it will affect one’s lifetime income. But this usually results in not fully achieving one’s potential. Generally, people tend to choose a job with the highest net earnings, ignoring the need for self-achievement from work, and thus do a job that is not best suited. In addition to high pay, are there other factors that influence people’s occupational choice? Perhaps if people choose jobs by their own talent, it will be beneficial for both society and themselves. This thesis proposes a model of occupational choice accompanied with the decisions of intertemporal consumption, human capital investment and bequest, to investigate the possibilities of occupation mismatch. In the model we categorize jobs into two types- one with income certainty and the other with income uncertainty. Doing a job with income uncertainty, an individual is able to make a further investment of human capital to improve his ability so as to increase the chance of earning high wage. A riskless job needs no additional private investment. The two types of job also differ in the requirement of labor ability. People obtain utilities from consumption, bequest, and self-achievement. If an individual’s job matches his talent, a positive effect on self-achievement will present, whereas a mismatch between job skill and talent brings a negative effect on self-achievement. This study aims to understand why an individual selects an occupation which does not match his talent, while facing two types of job with different risk as well as skill requirement. We find that the value people individually place on consumption relative to self-achievement and subsistence consumptions both significantly affect the determination of occupation. First of all, regardless of what the endowment of talent is, a person paying less attention on consumption has higher possibility to choose a right job. Secondly, when subsistence consumptions rise, earnings need to synchronously increase so as to avoid the wrong switch of occupations. Thirdly, for those people whose talents suit for the occupation with uncertain income, if future subsistence consumption rises, then the increase in the high level of earnings won’t matter much to avoid the wrong switch of occupations. Instead, an increase in the low level of earnings can reduce the possibility of having a wrong job. Some literatures point out that the implementation of an unconditional basic income measure will induce people to switch their jobs suitably, especially for those persons whose talent matches with the job with uncertain income. However, according to the simulation results of this study, this measure has an incentive effect only for the non-risk job. Government grant-in-kind for future subsistence consumption will effectively reduce the possibility of occupation mismatch for whom suitable for the job with risk.

並列關鍵字

occupational choice ； job mismatch ； income uncertainty

參考文獻

Banerjee, A. V. and A. F. Newman, “Occupational Choice and the Process of

Chakraborty, A. and A. Citanna, “Occupational Choice, Incentives and Wealth

Colombino, U., “Is Unconditional Basic Income a Viable Alternative to Other Social Welfare Measures?” IZA World of Labor, February 2015. Website: http://wol.iza.org/articles

Model of Educational Investment with Credit Market Imperfections”, Journal of Economic Inequality, 12:73–98, 2014.

Hum, D. and W. Simpson, “Economic Response to a Guaranteed Annual

國際替代計量

報酬不確定性對工作選擇的影響

全文下載

主題瀏覽