Pay for Performance

Durham, Cathy C.; Bartol, Kathryn M.

doi:10.1002/9781119206422.ch12

Cited by 25 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As mentioned above, three sources for financial incentives that are associated with different underlying mechanisms can be summarized (Durham & Bartol, 2000): Individual, team-based, and organizational. In our meta-analysis, we focus on individual and team-based financial incentives because they have more features in common compared with organizational rewards.…”

Section: Review Of Conceptual Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To create an appropriate reward system, team composition, as well as reward characteristics and distribution rules, needs to be carefully considered, including factors on an organizational (i.e., personnel selection and development, frequency and amount of rewards, leadership), team (i.e., team characteristics, level and type of performance measurement), and individual level (i.e., importance of rewards, commitment, personality). Durham and Bartol (2000) and DeMatteo et al (1998) offered several recommendations for the design and implementation of reward systems. The results of our study have also shown that equitably distributed rewards lead to higher performance than equally distributed rewards, which indicate that executives and managers should design a team appraisal and feedback process (see London, 2007, for practical recommendations).…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should be noted that, with the change in organizational environments and the prevalence of teamwork (Kozlowski & Ilgen, ), the question of who should be rewarded becomes more important. Durham and Bartol () described three potential sources for financial incentives including individual, team, and organizational. While there is little research on organizational‐based rewards, numerous studies have examined the role of individual and team‐based rewards on productivity (see DeMatteo et al ., ; Honeywell‐Johnson & Dickinson, ; Jenkins, Mitra, Gupta, & Shaw, ; Rynes, Gerhart, & Parks, ; for reviews).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The effect of financial incentives on performance: A quantitative review of individual and team‐based financial incentives

Garbers

Konradt

2013

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

172

149

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We meta‐analysed 146 studies (n = 31,861) to examine the effects of individual and team‐based financial incentives on peoples' performance and to explore potential moderators. The overall effect size of the individual incentives (116 studies) was positive (g = 0.32). Moderator analyses revealed effect sizes to be larger for field studies (g = 0.34) than for laboratory studies (g = 0.29), larger for qualitative (g = 0.39) than quantitative performance measures (g = 0.28), and smaller for less complex tasks (g = 0.19). Results on team‐based incentives (30 studies) indicated a positive effect regarding team‐based rewards on performance (g = 0.45), with equitably distributed rewards resulting in higher performance than equally distributed rewards. This relationship was larger in field studies and smaller for less complex tasks. In addition, our results show that the effect of team‐based rewards depends on team size and gender composition. Implications for organizational rewards and suggestions for future research are discussed. Practitioner points Our study demonstrates the importance of rewarding employees as teams to motivate them to a greater extent. The results show that equitably distributed rewards lead to higher performance than equally distributed rewards. Managers should design their appraisal and feedback process for individual team members and the team as a whole. Our results provide useful information regarding the creation of appropriate reward systems. Differences in reward characteristics, team composition, and distribution rules offer practical implications for factors on organizational (i.e., personnel selection, frequency, and amount of rewards), team (i.e., team characteristics, type of performance measurement), and individual level (i.e., importance of rewards, personality).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Conceptual Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effect of financial incentives on performance: A quantitative review of individual and team‐based financial incentives

Garbers

Konradt

2013

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

172

149

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the desired outcome in a pay-for-performance system is typically related to business goals such as increased client retention, the desired outcome in an outcome-based incentive model is health status improvement. Several factors are required for effective pay-for-performance systems 24 : 1) clearly defined performance objectives; 2) well-communicated performance objectives; 3) individuals possess the knowledge, skills, abilities, and self-efficacy to meet performance objectives; and 4) aligning incentives with individuals’ value systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcome-based and Participation-based Wellness Incentives

Barleen¹,

Marzec²,

Boerger³

et al. 2017

Journal of Occupational &Amp; Environmental Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:This study examined whether worksite wellness program participation or achievement of health improvement targets differed according to four incentive types (participation-based, hybrid, outcome-based, and no incentive).Methods:The study included individuals who completed biometric health screenings in both 2013 and 2014 and had elevated metrics in 2013 (baseline year). Multivariate logistic regression modeling tested for differences in odds of participation and achievement of health improvement targets between incentive groups; controlling for demographics, employer characteristics, incentive amounts, and other factors.Results:No statistically significant differences between incentive groups occurred for odds of participation or achievement of health improvement target related to body mass index, blood pressure, or nonhigh-density lipoprotein cholesterol.Conclusions:Given the null findings of this study, employers cannot assume that outcome-based incentives will result in either increased program participation or greater achievement of health improvement targets than participation-based incentives.

show abstract

The money priming debate revisited: A review, meta‐analysis, and extension to organizations

Stajković

Greenwald

2022

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of primed money have received widespread attention in social psychology but not in the organizational literature. This research examines whether priming money causes people to think and behave in ways consistent with how they would act if they received real money. Money priming research has not made many inferences to organizations, but the potential implications of the findings for the workplace are thought-provoking. However, because some money priming studies failed to replicate and many findings are mixed, we review this literature and meta-analyze the effects of primed money on two organization-related outcomes. Meta-analytic results (12 259 participants, 90 effects adjusted for dependence, and 34 studies) showed that primed money increased performance (d = .38), but it also boosted selfishness (d = .33). These effects were moderated by perceptual or behavioral outcome measures, where primed money increased behavioral selfishness (d = .72) over twice as much as it did behavioral performance (d = .33). These meta-analytic results clarify extant literature, provide a new platform for future money priming research in organizations, and offer new alternatives for managers looking for viable options to improve employee functioning.

show abstract

Pay for Performance

Cited by 25 publications

References 71 publications

The effect of financial incentives on performance: A quantitative review of individual and team‐based financial incentives

The effect of financial incentives on performance: A quantitative review of individual and team‐based financial incentives

Outcome-based and Participation-based Wellness Incentives

The money priming debate revisited: A review, meta‐analysis, and extension to organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About