COMPENSATION AND BENEFIT

Compensation and Benefits in relation with relative superiority and employee engagement

Abstract

Purpose - This paper will explore the reasons why many organisations do not evaluate the effectiveness of their reward policies and practices, it will examine the approaches used by those organizations which do evaluate, and develops a model of evidence-based reward management which describes how evaluation can take place.

Design/methodology/approach - The paper will study why organisations do or do not evaluate reward and an examination of what organizations taking evaluation seriously were doing about it. The study will be based on a survey of 173 reward and HR practitioners and 13 case studies.

Practical implications - Information about the evaluation practices of the case study organizations and the concept of evidence-based reward management as an approach to evaluation provide guidance to practitioners on how they can measure the effectiveness of their reward policies and practices.

Chapter 1: Introduction

A failure to evaluate pay and reward practices is a critical blind-spot for many of those involved in reward management. This was noted by Pfeffer (1998, p. 213) who wrote that: “Little evidence demonstrates the efficacy of rewards, although much evidence indicates that rewards and their design loom large in management attention”.

The study clues set out in this paper will show that managers in the Middle East seem to be reluctant to assess reward. This retains back improvement in the area and conceives a hurtful rhetoric/reality gap. Bevan (2006, p. 3) proposed that this is “widest in the locality of pay management which is very powerfully propelled by fads, me-tooism and history”. We could find only two study investigations that systematically addressed this topic (Corby et al., 2005; Scott et al., 2006, 11).

The evaluation of teaching has obtained much more attention; for demonstration, amidst other ones, Aragon-Sanchez et al., 2003; Warr et al., 1999; Yang et al., 1996) and the developed teaching planks in the 1960s (Kenney and Reid, 1986). An arranged set about to evaluation was supported by Hamblin (1974) and evolved by Kirkpatrick (1994). The implication of come back on buying into as an entails of assessing teaching was emphasized by Kearns (2005). A more general “return on expectations” procedure which assesses the span to which the foreseen advantages of any discovering buying into have been appreciated was supported by Sloman (2007).

The need of concern in the evaluation of pay mismatched with the substantial and extending aim on teaching evaluation demonstrated that farther study on pay evaluation was required. Our study inquiry was: to what span and why is pay evaluation conveyed out? On the cornerstone of the study clues accessible, we furthermore liked to enquire the likelihood of assembling a form showing how the effectiveness of pay principles and practices might be assessed (Sloman¸2007, 33).

Chapter 2: Literature review

Research on assessing reward

Corby et al. (2005) undertook face-to-face interviews in 15 large, unionized organizations in Middle East between 2000 and 2002. The study discovered that little prescribed evaluation of alterations in yield and ranking schemes had been conveyed out and that ...