Benefits Of Pay For Performance

Weyerhaeuser uses a pay for performance system and utilizes a performance management process (PMP) to evaluate employee’s annual performance and that performance rating is used in calculating the individual’s merit pay increase. Over the years, Weyerhaeuser’s pay for performance compensation strategy has undergone several changes and improvements. The company utilizes merit increases where an individual’s yearly increase is based on how well they have performed against objectives. Performance management is directly tied to compensation in a pay for performance system and is based on how well an individual performs during the year against specific, measurable goals is tied to how much they will receive in a merit pay system. According to Milkovich, Newman and Gerhart (2014, p. 337), ‘a merit pay system links increases in base pay (called merit increases) to how highly employees are rated on a performance evaluation.” How well your merit pay system works and is seen by the employees as effective, fair, and a tool to increase motivation and retention is based on how well performance is actually measured and the ability to quantify performance. Though there are challenges with the merit pay system, Heathfield (n.d., par. 9) shares, “even with the limitations that exist in the awarding of merit pay, merit pay is your best opportunity to ensure that your outstanding performers remain with your company and continue to make their

A Performance-Based Pay system is an increasingly popular compensation method used by organizations to increase productivity. A goal for all companies is to try and remain competitive and control costs, this is a reason for performance-based pay systems becoming more popular. This type of system attempts to link compensation to performance. (Gena Richter, 2002) These systems are directly tied to organization or individual performance and are most effective when based on objective measures of quantity or quality of performance. If we wish to have a direct impact on work motivation, it must be linked directly to the performance of desired behaviors. In order for to put this type of system into place, performance evaluations must be conducted regularly , as well as training and development for those with performance that isn't quite up to par. These additional resources will be necessary for our organization if we implement a performance based pay system. (William B. Bernathy, Ph. D., 2004)

The company uses a merit based pay structure to recognize employee performance. Yearly evaluations of performance are conducted to rate employee’s results of the year compared to previously set goals. Kraft Heinz recognizes employees at every level for outstanding performance. In 2014, over a thousand employees were promoted because of their high performance and the value they added to the organization (Kraft Heinz, "Careers", 2015). Merit-based pay is based on individual performance. This method of pay and raises creates a link between rewards and the employee’s performance throughout the year. A danger of merit based pay, in organizations like Kraft Heinz Co., is that management might give merit based raises/promotions on how they perceive the employee will perform, so they may over or under estimate pay decisions (Judge & Robbins, 2016, pp. 137). However, the end of the year assessments the company conducts to review performance and set goals for the next year would help to reduce this

A well-articulated compensation philosophy drives organizational success by aligning pay and other rewards with business strategy. It provides the foundation for plan design and administration and anchors current and future plans to the company's culture and values (Kaplan, 2006, p.32). Recognizing and rewarding achievement is the cornerstone of the company A’s compensation philosophy. The mission of the company is to attract, select, place and promote all individuals based on their qualifications. The company believes that performance-based compensation helps attract, develop and retain talented professionals. In addition to base pay which based upon local market conditions and targeted to be above market, the company provides the following types of potential compensation to reward performance:

To foster competitiveness and deliver better results, there is a program called STACK where employees are ranked based on the work done and their incentive is decided based on it. Better the rank, better the incentives.

This paper will examine setting the stage for strategic compensation and bases for pay. There are three main goals of compensation departments: internal consistency, market competitiveness, and recognition of individual contributions. Internally consistent compensation systems define the relative value of each job among all jobs within a company. (Martocchio, pg. 22, 2011) With this system companies want employees to be paid more based on their qualifications and responsibilities. They believe someone with less experience should be paid differently. To determine such evaluation companies use job analysis in order to provide job descriptions. The job evaluation is to determine pay according to a particular position. Market-competitive

Pay for performance systems have further been proven to have two advantages for organizations: attracting more high-quality employees and motivating employees to exert more effort at their jobs. (Gordon, Kaswin) This paper will show the positive benefits of performance pay as

Reward Management (RM) has been defined as the distribution of monetary and non-monetary rewards to employees in an effort to align the interests of the employees, the organisation, and its shareholders (O’Neil, 1998). In addition O’Neil (1998) also suggests that a RM system can serve the purpose of attracting prospective job applicants, retaining valuable employees, motivating employees, ensuring legal requirements relating to direct and indirect rewards are not violated, assisting the company in achieving human resource and business objectives, and ultimately assisting the organisation in obtaining a competitive advantage.

Recognizing and rewarding high-performance is a key recommendation for any approach when managing any merit pay program (HRIS 2012). Merit pay is a compensation system where base pay increases and is determined by an individual’s performance. Using a merit pay plan is a good way for an organization to reward high performance is one benefit when using merit pay programs. The first step in implementing or improving a merit pay program is to have a solid performance management program, and this is another way a merit pay program is beneficial. Merit pay is a way to be successful and effectively implement merit pay with a uplift in salaries, and this is a third way using a merit pay program is beneficial to an organization. There are some drawbacks when using merit pay programs, such as paying some employees more than others. If you pay high-performing workers more than low- performing employees, the high- performers may stay, causing the low- performers to complain or leave the organization. A second drawback in using merit pay program is that employees become less motivated if not paid to their satisfaction. For example, if employees feel they should be making more money for their performance, this causes them to have low self esteem, and want to find employment at other organization. The last drawback associated with

Although research generally confirms that pay-for-performance plans can influence greater outcomes, it is unclear how effective different pay plans are relative to each other (Park, 2012). Like most things in business, compensation is something that requires evaluation, study, assessment, strategy, modeling and integration.  Achieving a pay for performance culture does not happen without paying attention to the behaviors, activities, rewards and motivations that have to be linked and reinforced through a well engineered and successfully executed process.  Actually if that process does not tie rewards to shareholder financial objectives, employ the proper mix of compensation elements, result in meaningful dollars, embrace performance that employees can impact and are effectively communicated and reinforced, then the results it produces will likely fall short (Vision Link Advisory Group, 2013).

The final problem that we identified is the incoherence of inclusion of the cumulative merit in the calculation of salaries. In the case-study we can read that the system includes cumulative merit. However it is not clear how it is included in the compensation system. In one hand it is said that they measure performance over time at Vitality but in the other hand it is not accounted for rewarding employees.

Pay for performance is a quite rational theory. According to the U.S. Merit System Protection Board (2006), “Pay for Performance refers to a pay strategy where evaluations of individual and/or organizational performance have significant influence on the amount of pay increases or bonuses given to each employee” (p.1). This theory hope to use different salary to motivate and punish the employees according to the evaluation of their working performance. However, in the real world, it is very hard to implement in every organization, particularly in government and nonprofit organizations.

An incentive pay program can reward employees who continue to produce superior work or encourage employees who already produce good work to best. Sometimes, use an incentive system when employees are lack of enthusiasm of getting down to work and improving things. If everyone in the same job classification gets the same pay, there is no real incentive to do an outstanding job (French, 1990). Various incentive plans used to motivate all employees such as production staff, sales staff, administrative staff and managerial and professional staff on an individual basis. To be improved employee work performance, the incentive pay programs need to be fairly matched with the employees’ expectation. Properly designed and maintained incentive pay program has the potential to increase employees’ productivity and work performance.

Thompson (2006) argues that the performance system should work in line with the merit ideals (496). However, the performance system that has been put in place has created a noticeable bias against disregarding hierarchical authority in ways that undermine merit ideals. The pay-for-performance system gives the supervisors greater ability to influence the amount of the annual pay increases their juniors receive (Thompson, 2006, 498). Therefore, Thompson (2006) suggests that in civil service, merit and performance are related. However, in the current system, the

As cited in Zhou, Zhang & Montoro-Sa ́nchez (2011) reward management is a key function in HRM systems in modern enterprises, playing an important role in attracting, retaining and motivating employees (Milkovich and Newman, 2004). Furthermore, Schuler and Jackson (as cited in Esteves & Caetano, 2010) state that the focal point of success of companies today is centered on the effective use of human resources.