If you come, will they build it? The impact of the design and use of a performance management system on researcher motivation

Enabling formal MCS design and use: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research

“…This bibliometric analysis shows that the most influential research, measured based on the number of citations [4] within the reviewed case studies, are Ahrens and Chapman (2004, 25 citations), Wouters and Wilderom (2008, 17 citations) and Free (2007, 12 citations). Four case studies (Aase, 1998; Pil and Fujimoto, 2007; Pogrebnyakov et al , 2017; Wright et al , 2012) were not cited by any others reviewed in this meta-synthesis.…”

“…Some of these case studies (Chenhall et al , 2017; Jollands et al , 2015; Kraus et al , 2017; Rooney and Cuganesan, 2013) also highlight how Ouchi’s (1979) control mechanisms are connected to the objects of control and levers of control. Although other case studies (Frow et al , 2010; Groen et al , 2012; Mundy, 2010; Pogrebnyakov et al , 2017; Ukko et al , 2017; Wouters and Roijmans, 2011; Wouters and Wilderom, 2008) include ideas from Otley (1999), they do not explicitly build their conceptualizations on his MCS framework. In total, 23 reviewed case studies do not directly use any MCS framework.…”

“…The case studies (Ahrens and Chapman, 2004; Frow et al , 2010; Jordan and Messner, 2012; Wouters and Wilderom, 2008) partly link planning and cybernetic controls (goal-setting and associated budgets or PMS) or their development with the need to consider reward/compensation. As intrinsic motivation is widely described as a forceful driver of work behaviors and a way to avoid employee resistance to organizational change (Adler et al , 1999; Chenhall et al , 2017; Jollands et al , 2015; Pogrebnyakov et al , 2017), a common challenge of reward/compensation controls is preventing an unintentional reduction of intrinsic motivation through an improper emphasis on extrinsic motivation based on pecuniary reward. Reward/compensation controls linked to individual performance also bear the risk of suboptimal decisions because managers tend to prefer short-term attitudes instead of long-term commitment (Mundy, 2010; Wright et al , 2012).…”

“…However, MCS research concerning the generic features of enabling formalization so far has not considered controls for reward/compensation. It may be worthwhile for future research to study the generic features of enabling formalization in the design of reward/compensation controls, specifically bonus payments, as many case studies (Adler et al , 1999; Ahrens and Chapman, 2004; Jordan and Messner, 2012; Pil and Fujimoto, 2007; Pogrebnyakov et al , 2017) have highlighted a large portion of bonuses or other variable payments in organizations.…”

A systems-based R&D management model for the road and transport engineering sector applied to a community access roads and transport research programme

“…Balanced Score Card approach A Balanced Score Card (BSC) is a performance measurement system for implementing strategy and basically consists of a set of performance measures (broader than mere financial measures) that are cascaded down from the corporate level to the business unit level and finally the employee level (Bremser and Barsky 2004;Kaplan and Norton 2001). Using the indicators of a BSC at researcher level should be exercised with care though due to the uncertainty associated with research and potential negative effect on researcher motivation (Pogrebnyakov, Kristensen, and Gammelgaard 2017). The benefits of using this approach include the followingof which most are relevant to ReCAP (Bremser and Barsky 2004):…”