Search results

Reviews the development of the concept of reward management within the context of other apparently innovative approaches to pay and the role of government policy from the 1960s to the 1990s. These are largely seen to have been ineffective and reward management to be another new wine in an old bottle.

While the business process management (BPM) literature highlights the significance of aligning employee appraisals and rewards practices with business processes, little is known about the realization. The purpose of this paper is to concretize the impact of process-oriented appraisals and rewards on business process performance and to provide empirical evidence on how organizations actually align their appraisals and rewards practices with BPM.

A mixed-method approach has been employed by combining survey results with case studies to offer first-hand evidence. Survey data have been used to quantify the real impact of process-oriented appraisals and rewards. Next, case studies with 10 organizations have allowed us to gain deeper insight into organizational practices for making appraisals and rewards more process-oriented.

The survey proves that process-oriented employee appraisals and rewards positively affect performance if different employee levels are involved. The case studies reveal similarities and differences in alignment efforts across organizations, based on pattern-matching and a multidimensional analysis, resulting in four alignment patterns.

The findings extend knowledge about appraisals and rewards within a business process context by providing a quantification and pattern refinement, which specifically advance a BPM-facilitating culture.

Managers and executives benefit from the recommendations for a gradual BPM adoption to improve the success of their business processes and their people-related practices.

The authors offer one of the first in-depth, cross-disciplinary studies that intend to bridge between the disciplines of BPM and human resource management (HRM).

Reviews reward management practice in the construction industry, based on a postal survey of larger construction firms. The research results provide little evidence of thorough‐going use of reward management to encourage and reinforce organizational change. Collective agreements survive for manual employees. Non‐manual employees are loosely grouped in broad‐banded grading structures with significant scope for managerial discretion in the treatment of individual salaries. However, there is little evidence of developed performance management systems. The absence of more formalized reward systems may provide a short‐term benefit in allowing considerable flexibility but may have negative implications for long‐term productivity, the control of wage costs and the availability of skills. Given the uneven gender balance, existing pay systems could also give rise to claims for equal pay.

This paper aims to investigate the combined effect of two interventions, perspective taking and incentives, on auditors’ professional skepticism (hereafter skepticism) when auditing complex estimates. Specifically, this paper examines the different ways that perspective taking (management versus inspector) and incentives (absent versus reward versus penalty) combine to impact skepticism.

This paper uses an experiment with 177 experienced Big 4 auditors. The experiment used a 2 (management vs inspector perspective) × 3 (absent vs reward vs penalty incentives) between-subjects design.

In the absence of incentives, adopting a management perspective raises situational skepticism when measuring skepticism as appropriateness of management’s fair value estimate while adopting an inspector perspective raises situational skepticism when measuring skepticism as need for more evidence. The authors find some evidence that incentives complement perspective-taking by enhancing those aspects of skepticism for which perspective-taking performs poorly. When assessing management assumptions, auditors adopting an inspector perspective enhance their skepticism more substantially than those adopting a management perspective, and this enhancement is greater with rewards than with penalties. However, this study does not detect an interaction between incentive type and perspective-taking on auditor skepticism in relation to gathering additional evidence.

This paper extends the literature by shifting the focus from a single perspective to a comparison of two perspective-taking approaches and discusses how each of these approaches enhances different aspects of skepticism. This paper also illustrates the importance of the interplay between perspective-taking and incentives in enhancing auditor skepticism.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of reward systems on team performance and analyze how satisfaction with rewards can result in better working performance and cohesiveness in the job environment.

Data was collected from 32 single members of different teams working in 10 selected banks from the Middle East and North Africa region.

The analysis from empirical findings reveals that there is a positive link between reward systems and team performance. More particularly, profit sharing has positive effects on team performance and collective bargaining reward systems affect significantly team cohesiveness. These links create an opportunity for employers to use reward systems as a motivating factor to direct team behavior toward more employee retention.

This study contributes to the teamwork performance research stream by empirically studying how rewards improve team performance and cohesiveness in Eastern contexts. Studies in such contexts are relatively rare.

Customer‐contact employees are a critical asset of service organizations due to the interactive nature of service delivery. Customer‐contact employees are boundary spanners who attempt to serve both internal and external constituents. Attempting to serve two masters can result in role conflict and the present effort presents and tests a framework for understanding possible antecedents and consequences of such role conflict. Survey data collected from 200 telephone service employees in an insurance company revealed at least partial support for the following hypotheses: role conflict emerges when there is a discrepancy between what employees think customers expect of them and what they report management rewards them for doing; role conflict, in turn, is related to employee attitudinal (e.g. job satisfaction) and behavioral (e.g. absenteeism) outcomes; and role conflict mediates the relationship between service orientation discrepancy and employee outcomes. Implications of the results for the management of service employees and service quality are presented.

A major requirement and practice in human resource management of an organisation is the award of appropriate reward packages to employees. This paper aims to examine the importance attached to reward packages by personnel of quantity surveying firms (QSFs) and the level of adoption of the packages with a view to develop important ones that can enhance quality of performance and reliability of the employees.

Questionnaires were administered on registered quantity surveyors employed in QSFs in the study area, which was Lagos State, Nigeria. Mean item score and chi-square were used to examine the significance of importance attached to available reward packages by employees, whereas factor analysis was used to highlight and group identified available reward packages.

Basic pay, that is salary and wages, is the most important and mostly used reward package, whereas the least are service recognition and profit sharing. Most of the reward packages were found to be important to the development of QSFs, and the variables were extracted and grouped into eight components.

As much as basic pay is a global and traditional reward system, managers and directors of QSFs should ensure that personnel with long-term commitment to the mission and vision of the company are duly recognised and rewarded accordingly. More so, profit from the proceed and benefits of the company should be shared in an appropriate manner, especially if employees are involved in securing jobs from clients.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which organizational learning is recognized through performance management systems as contributing to organizational effectiveness and competitive advantage.

It reviews several pieces of research, employing a wide range of methods, including: content analysis of managers’ reflections; questionnaires completed by managers and mentors; a large-scale survey involving ethnography, interviews and questionnaires; and analysis of documents from professional bodies and management delivery centres.

Genuine integration of individual and organizational goals or transfer of learning from the individual to the organization is not evident. Few qualitative measures of organizational performance are employed. The impact of metrics such as IIP or EFQM on organizational effectiveness is nor discernible. Management learning and development is rarely measured even when it is encouraged by the organization. There is a clear divide between research, teaching and learning and workplace practice. Performance management systems create perceptions of unreliability and inequity.

Espousing the value of learning and learning to learn, measuring them accurately and rewarding them with meaningful changes to working life can only improve organizational effectiveness. Research into the few organizations that have successfully embraced triple loop learning in their development of managers may offer a template for transformational learning to sustain competitive advantage.

Management development processes have been successful in developing individuals but less successful in achieving organizational development. This paper offers new insights into that gap and the omissions in the metrics by which performance is measured.

Many organizations are investing much time and effort in the management of quality. A few enlightened ones even have a vision to be the best. G. Howland Blackiston, the president of the Juran Institute, noted recently that, “All around the world companies are waking up to ‘quality’. Everyone is touting quality. Many are attempting it. Some organizations have gotten enviable results by using the concepts of ‘managing for quality’ dramatically to lower their costs, increase their profits and become more competitive in an increasingly competitive market. For these winners, quality has become an integral part of their business strategy”.