The HR310 Compensation And Benefits Unit 5 Assignment Reso ✓ Solved

The HR310 Compensation and Benefits Unit 5 Assignment Reso

For this assignment, select one of the articles about employee performance-based pay listed below and complete an Article Review.

• Acharya, V. V., Gabarro, M., & Volpin, P. F. (February 1, 2011). Competition for managers, corporate governance and incentive compensation. AFA 2012 Chicago Meetings Paper.
• Anik, L., & Quoidbach, J. (2013, Oct 8). The bonus employees really want, even if they don’t know it yet. Harvard Business Review.
• Bares, A. (2013, Apr 29). Pay satisfaction reporting made "clear and fair". Compensation Force.
• Boese, S. (2013, Jul 5). The Celtics, coaching, and compensation. Steve Boese’s HR Technology.
• Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2013, Apr 10). Does money really affect motivation? A review of the research. Harvard Business Review.
• DOL explores workplace flexibility, best practices for small firms. (2010). HR Focus, 87(12), 5-6.
• Dunn, K. (2013, Oct 28). The 5 biggest lies in hr... (#3 - we're into pay for performance). The HR Capitalist.
• Lytle, T. (2014). Making pay public. HRMagazine, 59(9), 24-26,28,30.
• Khazan, O. (2013, Aug 14). Why more vacation doesn't always mean happier workers. The Atlantic.
• Mike, J., B. (2013, Feb 14). Moving to merit-based incentives. Bersin by Deloitte.
• Norris, F. (2013, Apr 29). Median pay in U.S. is stagnant, but low-paid workers lose. New York Times.
• Phillips, J. (2014, June 4). Workplace Flexibility Practices Should Be . . . Flexible. Society for Human Resource Management.
• Sackett, T. (2013, Mar 27). Direct deposit has killed compensation motivation. The Tim Sackett Project.

Paper For Above Instructions

In the realm of compensation and benefits, understanding the factors that influence employee motivation and performance is critical for developing effective compensation strategies. This article review focuses on "Does money really affect motivation? A review of the research" by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, which critically assesses the impact of monetary compensation on employee motivation and overall job performance.

Chamorro-Premuzic (2013) investigates the fundamental question of whether financial incentives effectively drive employee motivation. The article synthesizes a considerable body of research, revealing that while money plays a significant role in employee satisfaction, it is not the sole determinant of motivation. The author emphasizes that while financial rewards are important, they often do not lead to long-term engagement or perpetual increases in productivity.

One key point presented in the article is that intrinsic motivation—driven by personal satisfaction, achievement, and curiosity—tends to overshadow extrinsic motivation associated with financial rewards. The author cites several studies that demonstrate how high-performing employees often derive their motivation from a sense of purpose rather than just monetary compensation. For example, research by Deci and Ryan (2000) illustrates that when employees find their work meaningful, they are more likely to exert effort and take initiative. This raises questions about the sustainability of performance-driven pay structures strictly based on financial incentives.

Furthermore, Chamorro-Premuzic (2013) discusses how different types of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards can influence behavior and performance in various ways. For instance, while performance-based pay can encourage short-term productivity boosts, it often leads to a competitive environment that may undermine collaboration among team members. This echoes the sentiments expressed by Dunn (2013), who argues that the focus on pay-for-performance strategies often masks deeper issues within organizational culture that can detrimentally affect employee morale and cohesion.

The article also highlights the counterproductive effects of overemphasizing financial rewards. Chamorro-Premuzic (2013) suggests that if employees perceive financial rewards as the primary motivator, it can lead to a "crowding out" effect where intrinsic motivation diminishes, potentially resulting in lower job satisfaction and engagement. Workers might feel pressured to meet performance benchmarks strictly for financial gain rather than for passion or personal growth, which can ultimately lead to burnout and attrition.

In examining the role of performance-based pay, Chamorro-Premuzic (2013) notes the importance of a balanced approach. Organizations are encouraged to consider a multidimensional compensation framework that integrates both monetary and non-monetary incentives. For instance, recognition programs, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment can be just as influential as salary increases in fostering motivation and commitment among employees. This aligns with the principles outlined in agile management, where flexibility and team dynamics are prioritized over rigid compensation structures.

Moreover, the article reviews the changing landscape of employee expectations regarding compensation. Employees today increasingly seek holistic benefits beyond traditional salary packages, reflecting a broader trend toward workplace flexibility, work-life balance, and personal development opportunities (DOL, 2010). As the workforce demographics shift, businesses must adapt to these changing expectations to remain competitive in attracting and retaining top talent.

In conclusion, while financial compensation remains a vital component of an effective employee engagement strategy, Chamorro-Premuzic (2013) argues that it should be complemented by a robust understanding of intrinsic motivation and organizational culture. Employers should seek to create a workplace environment that values contribution, offers opportunities for personal and professional growth, and recognizes achievements in a meaningful way, transcending the narrow focus on performance-based pay alone.

This insight aligns with the viewpoints expressed by Bares (2013) regarding the importance of transparent and equitable pay practices fostering greater employee satisfaction. By critically evaluating the use of performance-based pay in context, organizations can develop strategic compensation frameworks that promote engagement, reduce turnover, and enhance overall productivity.

References

• Acharya, V. V., Gabarro, M., & Volpin, P. F. (2011). Competition for managers, corporate governance and incentive compensation. AFA 2012 Chicago Meetings Paper.
• Anik, L., & Quoidbach, J. (2013). The bonus employees really want, even if they don’t know it yet. Harvard Business Review.
• Bares, A. (2013). Pay satisfaction reporting made "clear and fair". Compensation Force.
• Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2013). Does money really affect motivation? A review of the research. Harvard Business Review.
• DOL. (2010). DOL explores workplace flexibility, best practices for small firms. HR Focus, 87(12), 5-6.
• Dunn, K. (2013). The 5 biggest lies in hr... (#3 - we're into pay for performance). The HR Capitalist.
• Lytle, T. (2014). Making pay public. HRMagazine, 59(9), 24-26,28,30.
• Mike, J., B. (2013). Moving to merit-based incentives. Bersin by Deloitte.
• Norris, F. (2013). Median pay in U.S. is stagnant, but low-paid workers lose. New York Times.
• Phillips, J. (2014). Workplace Flexibility Practices Should Be . . . Flexible. Society for Human Resource Management.