Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-1

A Human Resource A Human Resource Management ApproachManagement Approach

STRATEGIC STRATEGIC COMPENSATIONCOMPENSATION

Prepared by David Oakes

Chapter Chapter 4 4

Traditional Bases for Pay: Traditional Bases for Pay: Seniority and MeritSeniority and Merit

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-2

Collective BargainingCollective Bargaining

Designed to: Negotiate labor contracts Provide grievance procedures

Led to: Job control unionism Collective bargaining units Union shops

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-3

Seniority PaySeniority Pay

Designed to award job tenure Set base pay with time- designated increases

Facilitates administration of pay Avoids perception of favoritism Poor fit with most competitive strategies

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-4

Longevity PayLongevity Pay

Designed to Pay grade maximum for length of service To reduce employee turnover

Used for most government employees

General Schedule System for federal employees

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-5

General ScheduleGeneral Schedule Divided into 15 Steps Based on skills, education, & experience levels Employees eligible for 10 within-grade pay increases Step waiting periods of 1-3 years

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-6

Merit Pay PlansMerit Pay Plans

Pay increases based on performance Reward excellent effort or results Motivate future performance Helps retain valued employees In 2004, raises averaged 3.5%

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-7

Elements of Merit PayElements of Merit Pay

Based on objective & subjective indicators of job performance

Periodic performance reviews

Realistic & attainable standards

Pay increases reflect performance

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-8

Performance Appraisal PlansPerformance Appraisal Plans

Trait systems

Comparison systems

Behavioral systems

Goal - oriented systems

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-9

Trait System CharacteristicsTrait System Characteristics

Work quality

Appearance

Dependability

Cooperation

Initiative

Judgment

Leadership responsibility

Decision-making ability

Creativity

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-10

Comparison SystemsComparison Systems

Rates & ranks performance Pay raises based on ranking Types

Forced distribution Paired comparisons

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-11

Behavioral SystemsBehavioral Systems

Critical-incident technique (CIT) Behaviorally-anchored rating scales (BARS) Behavioral observation scales (BOS)

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-12

Critical Incident TechniqueCritical Incident Technique

Employees & supervisors identify & label job behaviors & results

Supervisors observe & record

Requires extensive documentation

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-13

Behaviorally-Anchored Rating Behaviorally-Anchored Rating ScalesScales

Based on 8 - 10 expected job behaviors

Employees rated on ability to

perform each behavior

Ratings highly defensible

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-14

Behavioral Observation ScalesBehavioral Observation Scales

Documents positive performance behaviors on job dimensions

Employees rated on exhibited behaviors

Ratings averaged for over-all rating

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-15

Goal - Oriented SystemGoal - Oriented System

Management- by-Objectives Supervisors & employees set objectives Highly effective technique Rated on how well objectives are met Mainly for professionals & managers

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-16

Performance Appraisal PracticesPerformance Appraisal Practices

Conduct a job analysis Incorporate results into ratings Trains supervisors on use Implement Formal appeals process

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-17

Sources of Performance Appraisal Sources of Performance Appraisal InformationInformation

Employee Supervisor Coworkers Subordinates Customers/clients

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-18

360 Degree Performance Appraisal360 Degree Performance Appraisal

Uses more than one appraisal source

Reduces recruiting & hiring costs

Appropriate for work team evaluations

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-19

Common Raters’ ErrorsCommon Raters’ Errors

Bias errors

Contrast errors

Errors of central tendency

Errors of leniency or strictness

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-20

Bias ErrorsBias Errors

First-impression effect Positive halo effect Negative halo effect Similar-to-me effect Illegal discriminatory biases

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-21

Contrast ErrorsContrast Errors

Supervisor compares employees’ performances to other employees, not to explicit performance standards What if the best employee is average?

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-22

Errors of Central TendencyErrors of Central Tendency

Supervisors rate all employees as average

Usually occurs when only extreme behaviors require documentation

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-23

Errors of LeniencyErrors of Leniency

Leniency errors-managers rate employees’ performances more highly than they would rate them using objective criteria

Causes employees to believe they are going to receive larger pay raises than they deserve

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-24

Pay For Performance LinkPay For Performance Link

Link appraisals to business goals Analyze jobs Communicate Establish effective appraisals Empower employees Differentiate among performers

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-25

Limitations of Merit Pay ProgramsLimitations of Merit Pay Programs

Failure to differentiate Poor measures

Supervisor biases

Poor communication

Undesirable social structures Using non-merit factors Undesirable competition

Motivational value small

Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4-26

Competitive Strategies Competitive Strategies Lowest-Cost

Reduce output costs per employee Merit pay works if tied to long - term productivity

Differentiation Make product or service unique Merit pay can promote creativity and risk-taking