1. Chapter 10 Reward Systems and Legal Issues
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

2. Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Overview
Reward Systems
Legal Issues
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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. 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

11. Selecting a CP Plan: Issues to Consider
Culture of organization
Strategic direction of organization
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. CP Plans to Enhance Strategic Directions (2)
Teamwork
Team sales commissions
Gainsharing
Competency-based pay
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. How to Make Rewards Work (Continued)
Rewards should be:
Visible
Contingent
Timely
Reversible
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

21. Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Pay Structures
Job Evaluation
Broad-banding
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

22. 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

23. 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

24. Types of Job Evaluation Methods
Ranking
Classification
Point
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

25. 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

26. Advantages of Using Ranking Method
Requires little time
Minimal effort needed for administration
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. Disadvantages of Using Point Method
Requires extensive administrative
Time
Effort
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

34. Does Job Evaluation Method Matter?
Fairness
Evaluators
Impartial
Objective
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

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

36. 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

37. 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

38. 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

39. 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

40. 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

41. 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

42. 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

43. 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

44. 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

45. 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

46. 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

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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

51. 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

52. 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

53. 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

54. 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

55. 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

56. 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

57. 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

58. Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Quick Review
Reward Systems
Legal Issues
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

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