Search results

Prior research suggests that cultural values affect individuals’ preferences in whether work rewards (i.e. pay and benefits) are allocated according to rules based on equity, equality, or need. However, this research has focussed primarily on societal-level values or individual-level operationalizations of values originally conceptualized at the societal level. Drawing on equity and social exchange theories, the purpose of this paper is to present a theoretical model and nine propositions that incorporate both individual and societal values as determinants of these reward allocation rule preferences.

The author briefly reviews of the relevant literature on values and reward allocation preferences and present arguments supported by prior research, leading to a model and nine propositions.

The author proposes that societal values and individual values have main and interactive effects on reward allocation preferences and that the effects of societal values are partially mediated by individual values.

The model and propositions present relationships that could be tested in future multi-level studies. Future conceptual/theoretical work may also build on the model presented in this paper.

The proposed relationships, if supported, would have important implications for organizational reward systems and staffing.

Prior research on reward allocation preferences focusses mostly on the effects of societal or individual values. This theoretical paper attempts to clarify and distinguish values at these two levels and to better understand their main and interactive effects on individual reward allocation rule preferences.

This review article focuses on the factors that affect the selection and implementation of three principles of distributive justice (i.e., equity, equality, and need) to reward systems in group and organizational settings. After presenting an overview of the assumptions, goals, and possible consequences associated with each of the three perspectives, the article then describes the moderating factors influencing distribution rule preferences across four levels of analysis: (1) the interorganizational, (2) the intraorganizational, (3) the work group, and (4) the individual. Some of the variables discussed include cross‐cultural differences, reward system implementation, task interdependency, work group climate, and individual characteristics. This material is then summarized through the use of a new conceptual model for describing allocation rule preferences. The article concludes with suggestions for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of two key team‐based pay characteristics – namely reward allocation procedures (i.e. reward based on norms of equity, equality or some combination of the two) and incentive intensity – on both the amount and type of help given to one another among members of outcome‐interdependent teams.

A total of 180 undergraduate students participate in a laboratory simulation with a 2 × 3 experimental design. Servicing virtual “clients,” participants receive pre‐scripted requests for assistance from anonymous teammates. ANOVA and hierarchical regression analyses are used to test the hypotheses.

Relative to equity‐oriented group‐based pay structures, equality‐oriented pay structures are found to be associated with both significantly more help giving in general and more of the type of help likely to enhance group‐level competencies (i.e. autonomous help). Incentive intensity strengthens the effects of reward allocation on the amount (but not the type) of help giving.

While the short time frame of the simulation poses a significant threat to external validity, the findings suggest that team‐based compensation practices may provide organizational leaders with an important tool by which to shape critical, helping‐related team processes, with potentially important implications for both team learning and performance.

Managers interested in promoting capacity‐building and helping among team members should avoid allocating team rewards strictly on the basis of the individual contribution.

This paper provides the first empirical findings regarding how alternative modes of team‐based reward distribution may influence key group processes among members of outcome interdependent teams.

This study compared the dimensionality and possession of the bases of supervisory power and their relationships to compliance and satisfaction with supervision between the U.S. (n = 459) and S. Korean (n = 625) managers. Results indicate that the factor structure of the power bases in the S. Korean sample was remarkably similar to those found in the U.S. sample; but whereas the U.S. managers reported relatively more position than personal power base, S. Korean managers reported relatively more personal than position power base. Similarities in the relationships of coercive, legitimate, and referent power bases to compliance, satisfaction, and dissimilarities in the relationships of expert and reward power bases to the criterion variables in the two samples are noted.

The purpose of this paper is to review relevant literatures on career success and develop a theoretical framework and testable propositions concerning how human capital, person‐environment fit and organizational support relate to career success. Whilst acknowledging the substantial literature that has accumulated regarding the various antecedents and operationalizations involved in employees' career success, there is little research as how person‐environment fit and career success are related.

Literature outlining approaches to career success is summarized and research at the intersection of person‐environment fit and organizational support/career success are reviewed. This is followed by a set of propositions based upon the antecedents of career success.

It is suggested that person‐environment fit and organizational support are important antecedents of career success. Knowledge of career changes and these antecedents help individuals and organizations manage career success.

Future research should examine empirically the linkages suggested by the paper along with other relationships asserted or implied by person‐environment fit and career success literature as mentioned in the paper.

Both employers and employees may benefit from integrating different types of fit into the psychological contract because each fit will impact aspects of career success. Therefore, organizations need to select and develop employees that can easily adjust and fit into careers that are compatible with their work environments.

This paper contributes to the literature by being one of the first to examine the effects of different types of person‐environment fit on career success.

The increased globalization in organizations has created the challenge to investigate and understand the organizational behaviours of employees from different cultural backgrounds. The current study investigated organizational justice from a cross-national perspective. Participants were Ghanaian (N = 320) and Finnish (N = 520) industrial workers. Data was collected with Blader and Tyler's (2003) scale. The Ghanaian participants responded to the English version, and the Finnish participants, a Finnish version. The analyses investigated differences on the three justice components (distributive, procedural and interactional). Further analyses examined which of the three best predicts job satisfaction, the relationships between demographic variables and justice perceptions. T-test, correlations, and regression analyses were used to test the hypotheses. Contrary to our expectations, Ghanaian respondents evaluated higher distributive and procedural justice. As predicted, they indicated more sensitivity to interactional justice than their Finnish counterparts. Significant links between all three justice components and job satisfaction were recorded in both samples. Interactional justice indicated the strongest influence. Demographic variables showed more impact on justice perceptions among Ghanaian workers than their Finnish counterparts. The study's theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Today marketers operate in globalised markets, planning new ways to engage with domestic and foreign customers alike. While there is a greater need to understand these two customer groups, few studies examine the impact of customer engagement tactics on the two customer groups, focusing on their perceptual differences. Even less attention is given to customer engagement tactics in a cross-cultural framework. In this research, the authors investigate customers in China and UK, aiming to compare their perceptual differences on the impact of multiple customer engagement tactics.

Using a quantitative approach with 286 usable responses from China and the UK obtained through a combination of person-administered survey and computer-based survey screening process, the authors test a series of hypotheses to distinguish across-cultural differences.

Findings show that the collectivists (Chinese customers) perceive customer engagement tactics differently than the individualists (UK customers). The Chinese customers are more sensitive to price and reputation, whereas the UK customers respond more strongly to service, communication and customisation. Chinese customers’ concerns with extensive price and reputation comparisons may be explained by their awareness towards face (status), increased self-expression and equality.

The findings challenge the conventional practice of using similar customer engagement tactics for a specific market place with little concern for multiple cultural backgrounds. The paper proposes strategies for marketers facing challenges in this globalised context.

Several contributions have been made to the literatures. First, the study showed the effects of culture on the customers’ perceptual differences. Second, the study provided more information to clarify customers’ different reactions towards customer engagement tactics, highlighted by concerns towards face and status. Third, the study provided empirical evidence to support the use of multiple customer engagement tactics to the across cultural studies.

How can managers optimally distribute rewards among individuals in a job group? While the management literature on compensation has established the need for equitable reimbursements for individuals holding similar positions in a function or group, an objective grounding of rewards allocation has certainly escaped scrutiny. This paper aims to address this issue.

Using an optimization model based on a financial rubric, the portfolio approach allows organizations to envision human capital assets as a set (i.e. a team, group, function), rather than independent contractors. The portfolio can be organized and managed for meeting various organizational objectives (e.g. optimizing returns and instrumental benefits, assessing resource allocations).

This research introduces an innovative portfolio management scheme for employee rewards distribution. Akin to investing in capital assets, organizations invest considerable resources in their human capital. In doing so, organizations, over time, create a portfolio of human capital assets. The findings reduce large variances in rewards distribution yet serving employee and management considerations.

The research has tremendous implications for managers who can mitigate serious equitable rewards distribution issues by creating a process that exemplifies rewards distribution using four different rewards allocation scenarios based on varying managerial prerogatives.

This research is a unique model that addresses a pressing human resource issue by solution based on a usable and feasible optimization mechanism from financial portfolio theory.

This study aims to present how a historical governance mechanism (a statutory rule of profit allocation) could answer the practical question of profit allocation, thereby proposing a methodology to enhance future quantitative studies.

The rule sets profit allocations to a predetermined set of stakeholders in corporate charters. It could be seen as a tool used by historical organisations to enact corporate social responsibility (CSR). The authors propose a straightforward way to calculate the payout ratios promised by this rule to each stakeholder. This methodology was applied to shareholders and used to calculate the promised dividend payout ratios.

This rule constitutes a natural experiment from which modern organisations could learn to implement the most relevant profit-allocation schemes given their CSR strategy. The authors propose calculating a promised payout ratio that would allow scholars to empirically examine the rule and its effects and provide accurate recommendations to these organisations.

This mechanism allows the study of profit allocations made to stakeholders (not limited to shareholders or employees like it is usually done). The promised payout ratio makes future quantitative investigations possible.

Modern organisations could use the CSR mechanism to allocate profits continuously in formats that would best fit their strategy and environment.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first article to examine the statutory rule of profit allocation per se, which proposes a new methodology to calculate payout ratios promised by the rule. The idea is to investigate their impact and provide recommendations for modern organisations to adapt.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate monetary reward allocation decision-making in an Arab-Islamic business environment.

In this mixed-method (quantitative/qualitative) study, data were obtained from a sample of 342 practicing managers of different genders and educational levels working in different industries at different organizational levels in Oman.

The more individualistic personal orientation, the more likely the decision makers are to allocate the biggest reward to the best performer and to believe that the equity principle is best for distributing rewards. In the context of a society transitioning from collectivistic to individualistic cultural values, the level of education is associated with preference for the equity principle in reward allocations.

The reported findings advance the theoretical understanding of how an emic perspective can explain reward allocation decision-making in Arab-Islamic environment.

Practical implications of this study lie in the guidance that global managers can draw regarding which allocation principle to use in which cultural context: the principle of equity – not equality, need or seniority – is embraced by organizations in the Arabian Gulf.

The study examines reward allocation decision-making behavior in the under-researched context of the Arabian Gulf and adds to the body of knowledge based on data obtained from practicing managers rather than college students.