Pay for Performance why it doesn't work in the Workplace Essay

Pay for Performance why it doesnt work in the Workplace - Essay ExampleTo show the extensive use of the reward system, the write writes on using rewards to recognize teamwork, monetary rewards for employees for undertaking trainings and gaining new skills.The author states that rewards often impede than they enhance performance on many tasks with specific accent to those that require creativity with the example of Japan and Germany countries that do not use reward incentives and are successful in employee motivation. The former(a) further explores the fact that thither are no empirical studies linking motivation to rewards showing poor implementation of compensation systems. In fact, research by Jenkins in 1986 shows no relation amongst quality performance and rewards (p 124). In a case where incentives were withdrawn, production decreased then after sometime rose to r all(prenominal) a better take aim than when there were incentives further showing that incentives do not motivat e workers for quality or higher productivity (p 124).The author then delves into the reasons for the failure of incentives including lack of essential that is the introduction of incentives unnecessarily resulting in lack of any impact on performance. The second reason is secrecy where there is no transparency on each employees earning leading to overestimation and belief of differences in pay resulting in low morale and turmoil at the workplace. Other reasons are lack of match surrounded by performances and pay and expense in rewards solved via using noncash rewards. The other reason is too big versus too small incentives where small incentives do not have an impact while large ones are not received by all the workers resulting in failure of incentives to motivate performance. Short-term versus long-term incentives are the other reasons for incentives failure where employees may make decisions countering long-term interests when incentives base on short-term performance. Objectivi ty versus subjectivity,