Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/macro-microeconomics/1636989-promise-and-peril
https://studentshare.org/macro-microeconomics/1636989-promise-and-peril.
Managers usually face potential problems in their attempt to implement pay-for-performance programs. Under pay-for-performance plans, the significant effort of the management is focused on motivating employees at the expense of other tasks relevant to organizational growth. However, the proponents of pay-for-performance argue that intelligent design of the plans remains crucial for evading implementation challenges for pay-for-performance programs.
There is a need for training on how to effectively implement pay-for-performance programs. According to the authors, it is essential to gain adequate knowledge of the scenario under which pay-for-performance implementation is taking place in order to develop an unbiased understanding of the topic. Using HP case studies, Beer and Cannon discovered that the management used pay-for-performance as an extra inducement to achieve higher employee performance. While creating a line between individual employees or teams in terms of performance so as to maintain fairness, the challenge of attaining desirable results becomes evident, especially when it is essential for teams or individuals to work together. In their article, the authors argue that managers abandoned their pay-for-performance plans because they perceived the programs to bear more costs than benefits to the company.
Read More