So one popular school of thought suggests that simply giving an employee a high level of base pay does more to boost performance and organizational commitment than trying to connect pay to performance through bonuses, incentives and the like. Proponents tell us that the best use of an employer’s money is to pay people enough to take the issue of money off the table.
For those of us in charge of designing and managing pay programs, however, it is tough to judge the veracity of this claim (and the advisability of implementing it in the organizations we serve) without knowing exactly what kind of additional money we’re talking about.
Is there some universal rule of thumb we can draw on? Does the answer differ from person to person – and, if so, by how much and in what ways?
In an effort to gather some helpful data, Compensation Force (with an assist here from TLNT) is conducting a very brief survey. The purpose of the survey is to pose this question to you and other full-time employees (sorry – no self-employed or independent contractors/consultants please) in order to find out how much more (if at all) you believe would have to be paid by your employer to take the issue of money off the table.
Please click here to take our very brief (< 5 minutes) survey.
And, if you would, please share the link with other workers who can provide their perspectives. Although I know many of us have an opinion about this philosophy – one way or another – It is my hope that everyone will respond honestly and realistically.
It is also my hope that we can get participation from people outside the field of HR and rewards, so any help you can provide in that regard is appreciated.
This was originally published on Ann Bares’ Compensation Force blog.