Human resource homework

profileforever
reward_systems_.ppt

Chapter 10

Reward Systems
and Legal Issues

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

1.pdf

P e r f o r m a n c e m a n ag e m e n t t h i r d e d i t i o n

h e r m a n ag u i n i s www.pearsonhighered.com

ISBN-13: ISBN-10:

978-0-13-255638-5 0-13-255638-3

9 7 8 0 1 3 2 5 5 6 3 8 5

9 0 0 0 0 a

g u

in is

P er

fo r

m a

n c

e m a

n a

g em

en t

t h

ir d

e d

it io

n

Overview

  • Reward Systems
  • Legal Issues

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Reward Systems: Overview

  • Traditional and Contingent Pay (CP) Plans

Reasons for Introducing CP Plans

Possible Problems Associated with CP

Selecting a CP Plan

  • Putting Pay in Context
  • Pay Structures

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Traditional Pay

  • Salary and salary increases are based on

Position

Seniority

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Contingent Pay (CP)

  • Salary and salary increases are based on:

Job performance

  • Also called: Pay for Performance
  • If not added to base pay, called:

Variable pay

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Reasons for Introducing CP (1)

  • Performance management is more effective when rewards are tied to results.
  • CP Plans force organizations to:

Clearly define effective performance

Determine what factors are necessary

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Reasons for Introducing CP (2)

  • Supervisors and employees are better able to understand what really matters.
  • CP plans enhance employee motivation to accomplish goals that match organizational needs.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Reasons for Introducing CP (3)

  • CP plans help to recruit and retain top performers.
  • CP plans projects good corporate image.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

CP Plans Help Improve Motivation When:

Employees see clear link between their efforts and resulting performance. (Expectancy)

Employees see clear link between their performance level and rewards received. (Instrumentality)

Employees value the rewards available. (Valence)

motivation =

expectancy x instrumentality x valence

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Possible Problems Associated with CP

  • Poor performance management system
  • Rewarding counterproductive behavior

(Rewarding A while hoping for B)

  • Rewards are not considered significant
  • Managers are not accountable

(The reward becomes the driver)

  • Extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation
  • Disproportionately large rewards for executives

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Selecting a CP Plan: Issues to Consider

Culture of organization

Strategic direction of organization

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Culture of Organization: Types of Organizations

  • Traditional

Top-down decision making

Vertical communication

Jobs that are clearly defined

  • Involvement

Shared decision making

Lateral communications

Loosely defined roles

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

CP Systems for Different Organizational Cultures

  • Traditional organizations

Piece rate

Sales commissions

Group incentives

  • Involvement organizations

Profit sharing

Skill-based pay

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

CP Plans to Enhance
Strategic Directions

  • Employee development

Skill-based pay

  • Customer service

Competency-based pay

Gainsharing

  • Overall profit

Executive pay

Profit or stock sharing

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

CP Plans to Enhance Strategic Directions (1)

  • Productivity

Individual

Piece rate

Sales commissions

Group

Gainsharing

Group incentives

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

CP Plans to Enhance Strategic Directions (2)

  • Teamwork

Team sales commissions

Gainsharing

Competency-based pay

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Putting Pay in Context

A reward increases the chance that:

  • Specific behaviors and results will be repeated, or
  • Employee will engage in new behavior and produce better results.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Rewards Can Include:

  • Pay
  • Recognition

Public

Private

  • Status
  • Time
  • Sabbaticals
  • Trust and Respect
  • Challenge
  • Responsibility
  • Freedom
  • Relationships

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

How to Make Rewards Work

  • Define and measure performance first and then allocate rewards.
  • Only use rewards that are available.
  • Make sure all employees are eligible.
  • Rewards should be both

Financial

Nonfinancial

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

How to Make Rewards Work (Continued)

  • Rewards should be:

Visible

Contingent

Timely

Reversible

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Pay Structures

  • Job Evaluation
  • Broad-banding

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Pay Structures

An organization’s pay structure

Classifies jobs

Into categories

Based on their relative worth

Is designed by job evaluation methods

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Job Evaluation

  • Method of data collection

Determine the worth of various jobs

Create a pay structure

  • Consideration of

KSAs required for each job

Value of job for organization

How much other organizations pay

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Types of Job Evaluation Methods

  • Ranking
  • Classification
  • Point

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Ranking

  • Create job descriptions
  • Compare job descriptions
  • Rank jobs

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Advantages of Using Ranking Method

  • Requires little time
  • Minimal effort needed for administration

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Disadvantages of Using Ranking Method

  • Criteria for ranking may not be clear.
  • Distances between each rank may not be equal.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Classification

  • A series of classes or grades are created.
  • Each job is placed within a job class.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Advantages of Using Classification Method

  • Jobs can be quickly slotted into structure
  • Employees accept method because it seems valid.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Disadvantages of Using Classification Method

  • Requires extensive time and effort for administration
  • Differences between classification levels may not be equal

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Point Method

  • Identify compensable factors (job characteristics)
  • Scale factors (e.g. on a scale of 1 through 5)
  • Assign a weight to each factor so the sum of the weights for all factors = 100 percent

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Advantages of Using Point Method

  • Establishes worth of each job relative to all other jobs within organization
  • Comprehensive measurement of relative worth of each job in organization
  • Easy to rank jobs when total points are known for each job

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Disadvantages of Using Point Method

  • Requires extensive administrative

Time

Effort

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Does Job Evaluation Method Matter?

Fairness

Evaluators

Impartial

Objective

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Compensation Surveys

  • Information on

Base pay

All other types of compensation

  • Conducted in-house or by consultants, such as:

www.salary.com or www.haypaynet.com

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Broad-Banding

  • Most commonly used pay structure
  • Pay structure collapses job classes into fewer (less than five) categories

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Advantages of Broad-Banding

  • Provides flexibility in rewarding people
  • Reflects changes in organization structure
  • Provides better base for rewarding growth in competence
  • Gives more responsibility for pay decisions to managers
  • Provides better basis for rewarding career progression

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Reward Systems: Summary

  • Traditional and Contingent Pay (CP) Plans

Reasons for Introducing CP Plans

Possible Problems Associated with CP

Selecting a CP Plan

  • Putting Pay in Context
  • Pay Structures

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Legal Issues: Overview

  • Performance Management and the Law
  • Some Legal Principles Affecting PM
  • Laws Affecting PM

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Performance Management and the Law

  • Performance management systems are usually legally sound if…

Procedures are standardized

Same procedures are used with all employees

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Some Legal Principles Affecting PM: Overview

  • Employment-at-will
  • Negligence
  • Defamation
  • Misrepresentation
  • Adverse Impact
  • Illegal Discrimination

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Employment-at-Will

  • Employment relationship can be ended at any time by:

Employer

Employee

  • Exceptions:

Implied contract

Possible violation of legal rights

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Negligence

  • If organization documents describe a system

and

  • It is not implemented as described,

  • Employee can challenge evaluation, charging negligence.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Defamation

  • Disclosure of performance information that is

Untrue and

Unfavorable

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Misrepresentation

  • Disclosure of performance information that is

Untrue and

Favorable

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Adverse Impact / Unintentional Discrimination

  • PM system has unintentional impact on a protected class.
  • Organization must demonstrate:

A specific KSA is a business requirement for the job

All affected employees are evaluated in the same way

  • Organization should review ongoing performance score data by protected class to implement corrective action as necessary.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Illegal Discrimination or Disparate Treatment

  • Raters assign different scores to employees based on factors that are NOT related to performance.
  • Employees receive different treatment as result of such ratings.
  • Employees can claim they were intentionally and illegally treated differently due to their status.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Employee Claim of Illegal Discrimination

  • Direct evidence of discrimination, or
  • Evidence regarding the following:

Membership in protected class

Adverse employment decision

Performance level deserved reward/different treatment

How others were treated (not in protected class)

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Employer Response to Claim of Illegal Discrimination

  • Legitimate and nondiscriminatory reason for action
  • Related to performance

Note: Good performance management system and subsequent performance-related decision, used consistently with all employees, provide defense

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Difference Between
Legal and Illegal Discrimination

  • LEGAL discrimination discriminates among employees based on their level of performance.

  • ILLEGAL discrimination is based on variables that should not usually be related to performance.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Laws Affecting PM

During past few decades, several countries have passed laws prohibiting discrimination based on:

  • Race or Ethnicity
  • Sex
  • Religion
  • National Origin
  • Age
  • Disability status
  • Sexual orientation

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Laws in the United Kingdom

  • Equal Pay Act of 1970
  • Race Relations Act of 1976
  • Sex Discrimination Act of 1975
  • Disability Discrimination Act of 1995
  • Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003
  • Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Laws in the United States of America

  • Equal Pay Act of 1963
  • Civil Rights Act of 1964
  • Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (as amended in 1986)
  • Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Characteristics of Legally Sound PM Systems

  • Organization:

The system is formally explained and communicated to all employees.

The system includes a formal appeals process.

Procedures are standardized and uniform for all employees within a job group.

The system includes procedures to detect potentially discriminatory effects or biases and abuses in the system.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Characteristics of Legally Sound PM Systems

  • Management

Supervisors are provided with formal training and information on how to manage the performance of their employees.

Performance information is gathered from multiple, diverse, and unbiased raters.

The system includes thorough and consistent documentation including specific examples of performance based on first-hand knowledge.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Characteristics of Legally Sound PM Systems

  • Employees

Performance dimensions and standards are:

Clearly defined and explained to the employee,

Job-related, and

Within the control of the employee.

Employees are given

Timely information on performance deficiencies and

Opportunities to correct them.

Employees are given a voice in the review process and treated with courtesy and civility throughout the process.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Legal Issues: Summary

  • Performance Management and the Law
  • Some Legal Principles Affecting PM
  • Laws Affecting PM

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Quick Review

  • Reward Systems
  • Legal Issues

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

10-*

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

*