Organization Awards Since the Industrial

Organization Awards

Since the Industrial Revolution, the distribution of rewards as a motivational tool to increase productivity and effectiveness has been of interest to organizations' management teams.

Employee reward systems continue to be a method of motivating workers to change their habits and key behaviors to benefit a business. When people believe they are being treated fairly or receiving benefits, they are more likely to be motivated; when they believe they are not being treated fairly, they are dissatisfied and will not perform as well. Being just or fair is the underlying basis of the equity theory. Equality theory is, as it sounds, it is the fact that everything is equal. Similarly, the needs rule specifies that organizational members receive allocations based on their need. Studies in recent decades show that cross-cultural reward allocation is also a topic of interest. That is, are employees motivated differently depending on their environment? In their study, Fischer et al. (2007) find differences in the use of reward allocation principles based on equity, equality, and need in work organizations: Reliance on equity is predicted by organization-level variables and high nation-level mastery; reliance on equality is only influenced by organization-level variables; and reliance on need is predicted by the unemployment rate and high nation-level embeddedness. This study showed that assuming wide generalities is not applicable to reward allocation; it is necessary to look at a number of different parameters to see what will best reward people.

Why do such differences occur in reward allocation? Diekmann (1997) believed that employees are self-interested and will frequently even take more than their equal share, especially when they believe it is socially acceptable and just. This is more the case in circumstances where what is fair is questionable. Further, people see unequal but favorable reward allocation as fairer than unequal but unfavorable distributions. Research has further shown that the more that people think they can get away with being self-serving in resource allocation decisions, the more they will do so. (Diekmann,1997, p.13). In one study of allocating pay, for example, the employees were more concerned with distributive justice when believing their behavior would be seen by others in the public than when thinking it would be not seen and private. This suggests that people act fairly in part because of what they think may be the result of other people's reaction to the self-serving behavior. People appreciate distributive equity that further supports their personal circumstances. On the other hand, more recently, social scientists, such as Miller (1999) have argued that people do care about justice and behave with justice-seeking behavior instead of this more selfish self-interest. In other words, there is no overall behavior that is common to all people.

As noted in Fischer et al. (2007), what motivates employees has normally been studied in laboratory settings, which is an artificial approach. or, the better alternative, studies have asked employees about their thoughts concerning the company's allocation policies. As noted, it is important to know what employees actually perceive instead of what decision makers intend to do. Thus, Fischer's research focused on employees' perceptions of the allocation decisions made by their superiors -- from the horse's mouth, so to speak.