Cipd Reward MNGMT

A free sample chapter from Reward Management, 2
nd
Edition by Stephen J Perkins and
Geoff White
Published by the CIPD.
Copyright CIPD 2011
All rights reserved; no part of this excerpt may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording,
or otherwise without the prior written permission of the Publishers or a licence permitting
restricted copying in the United Kingdom issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.
If you would like to purchase this book please visit www.cipd.co.uk/bookstore.
In this Introduction we set the scene for readers. Our mission is to provide
a systemic framework to guide those learning about and practising reward
management (defned below) to gain insight into what is involved and how to
chapter 1
Introducing the Reward
Management System
CHAPTER OBJ ECTI VES
At the end of this chapter you should understand and be able to explain the
following:
l Definitions of employee reward and its management through the medium of the
effort bargain, mindful of managerial approaches advocated as part of a new
organisational logic
l Alternatives to and consequences of managing employee reward, conceptualised
in systemic terms accounting for multiple contextual levels for situating effort
reward bargaining
l The structure of the book, and how to use it to grasp concepts and themes
intended to help navigate this complex and contested field of study.
CI PD PROFESSI ONAL MAP (PERFORMANCE AND REWARD)
COVERAGE:
To be able to understand and explain:
l How to evaluate the range of internal and external factors interacting with ideas about the
concept and practice of reward management, accounting for corporate, national, regional and
international contexts
l How to interpret organisational strategy and demographic profile to help situate the
management of an employment reward system and its component parts
l The factors that influence orientations to a reward system, such as equity, fairness, consistency
and transparency.
Reward Management 2
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
approach an area of people management that is as complex as it is fascinating.
As media headlines daily attest (Issue in Reward 1.1), people who deal in pay
determination seem to regularly disappoint. Tis is in spite of the welter of
analysis from academics and advice from popular commentators. Why the
disjunction? One likely culprit is the potentially bewildering array of reward
management alternatives to consider. And like any other area of people
management, while on the face of it self-evident, its worth remembering that
the focus of attention is people. People managers and employees in all
their diversity interpret and act on their impressions of the world of work and
organisation and ways of bringing order to these socio-economic institutions,
infuenced, in turn, by their unique character and situation.
Although numerous attempts have been made to do so, and managements
and other stakeholders may judiciously seek to minimise the risk of error, the
consequences are not easily predicted. Also, like the people who populate them,
the contexts for work and organisation are varied and continuously evolving.
Patricia Zingheim and Jay Schuster, US-based authors and management
consultants, use their book title Pay People Right! (2000) as a rallying cry to
employers to ensure that reward management systems are fundamentally
in alignment with their organisations strategic goals. Subtitling the volume
Breakthrough reward strategies to create great companies, they also argue that
pay is a powerful communicator of values and directions. Tis commentary
(referred to as a normative view, advocating the use of specifc reward plans and
practices on the basis that choosing these is the right thing to do) builds on a
similar line of reasoning by the same writing team a decade earlier. Te New Pay
(1990) popularises the work of Edward E. Lawler III, Distinguished Professor
of Business at the University of Southern California, who writes the Foreword.
Schuster and Zingheim (1992) open with a statement similar to the one in the
2000 volume: Pay provides organizations with a powerful communications
opportunity. . . Tose responsible for managing employee reward are told they
need to answer one question only: How can we fnd ways in which the workforce
can share in the organisations success? Tis is juxtaposed with a straw man
teaser: Do we wish instead to ofer employees anxiety, lost trust and discontent?
Reward (generally referred to in the USA as compensation) is put forward as the
accelerator pedal for an enterprise to speed the business process and success, a
means of making company performance initiatives . . . real (xv). It is part of the
formula people look for (ibid) when evaluating whether or not to work for an
employer (and by extension whether to stay with it and to work in ways aligned
with the employers expectations). Te authors provide what they describe as a
road map metaphorically to help users navigate towards attainment of the great
company promised in the subtitle.
We share the view that the choices employers make between the reward
management alternatives open to them explicitly and implicitly have the
potential to signal managerial priorities and intentions to all stakeholders
in formal organisations. Tat includes at least implicitly communicating the
assumptions shared by organisational leaders and those to whom they are
Introducing the Reward Management System 3
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
accountable (whether these are governments, private investors or trustees)
regarding the role and nature of the people wanted to perform work to fulfl the
corporate purpose and the basis on which value created will be distributed.
Te term reward management itself is signifcant, implying an active role for
employers not one in which external forces of supply and demand in jobs
and workers regulates employment. We will see in the next chapter, when we
discuss theoretical approaches to help evaluate reward management ideas and
action, that thinking varies over the role if any for managers in determining
wages and other payments to people related to employment. Caution is needed
to avoid reading too much into rhetorical statements to the efect that adopting
the right reward practices will produce outcomes that are equally universal in
the perceived benefts to the various parties. Even Zingheim and Schuster add
the caveat, somewhat mixing metaphors in doing so, that their reward-business
process accelerator . . . isnt a quick fx (2000: xvi). Tey suggest that Much of the
popular literature on management . . . avoids issues of pay, perhaps because its
harder to address than many of the gentler and less powerful change tools (2000:
xvii). Note here the implication that reward management is associated with
progressiveness: travelling from one organisational state to another. Tose long
sceptical of new pay discourse (ie writing intended to persuade to a particular
world view, not one shaped by a plurality of interests and contexts) have argued
that advocates practices may be associated with psychological outcomes of the
very sort Zingheim and Schuster (2000), for example, say they wish to eradicate:
in particular, a sense of personal anxiety when faced with pay that remains
permanently at risk (Heery, 1996).
Te remainder of this chapter is organised to satisfy three main objectives. First
is to clarify meaning(s) attached to employee reward management and the links
with relations around employment, accounting for chosen orientation(s) towards
workforce members. Secondly, to scrutinise repeated references to reward
systems, and then to appraise the utility of long-standing systems thinking
to help assemble and interpret material on the alternatives, consequences and
contexts for employee reward. Tirdly, feshing out the Book plan diagram
located just before the beginning of this chapter, to outline the structure and
content of the subsequent four parts arranged over another 11 chapters that make
up the book.
locati ng i deas and practi ces around reward
management
Looking at the basics, we briefy discuss the terms employee reward and reward
management. Employee reward represents one of the central pillars supporting
the employment relationship (Kessler, 2005): its management is likely to infuence
the character and quality of that relationship and its outcomes.
Reward Management 4
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Employee reward(s) may, however, be diferentiated between:
extrinsic, tangible or transactional reward for undertaking work in
employment, on the one hand, and
intrinsic reward derived from work and employment, on the other hand.
Extrinsic reward in the form of salary, incentive pay and benefts serves the
purpose of directly recognising the comparative value of organisational roles and
the contribution individuals may make in performing them. Extrinsic employee
benefts and perks delivered in a non-cash form (eg company cars, paid holiday
and health care), or deferred remuneration (eg predefned occupational pension
benefts or equity share-based rewards that may be fnancially realised at a future
date), may refect managerial eforts to keep rewards competitive, intended to
recruit and retain sufcient employees of the right calibre, and to secure work
accomplishment for the organisation. Benefts may also refect an employers
interest in employee wellbeing. Te nature and combination of extrinsic reward
is dynamic: for example, present-day contributions to an employees portable
retirement income fund may be ofered in place of a company pension, refecting
the increasingly fexible employment relationship.
Intrinsic reward may be further subdivided (Kessler, 2001). On the one hand,
environmental rewards may be manifested in the physical surroundings in which
work is performed, combined with other factors, such as the values displayed in
the workplace by organisational leaders and work supervisors, and perceptions of
their leadership quality. On the other hand, development-oriented rewards that tend
to be more individually directed may be ofered to recognise employee aspirations
to receive learning and development opportunities, and to gain acknowledgement
of outstanding work and build feelings of accomplishment wherever possible
consolidated tangibly through career advancement (Milkovich and Newman, 2004).
It is agued that extending the features of employee reward beyond those specifed
in the economic contract may help to secure employees discretionary efort
(Wright, 2005: 1.2.2). Tis intrinsic or psychological contract in work relationships
(Levinson et al, 1962; Schein, 1965; Rousseau, 1989, 1995) features in commentary
advocating attention to the total reward proposition (see Chapter 9).
Employee compensation, remuneration or reward (terms that may be used
interchangeably in the literature) may be dened as all forms of nancial returns
and tangible services and benets employees receive (Milkovich and Newman,
2004: 3).
Work under an employment relationship is undertaken in return for pay (Rubery
and Grimshaw, 2003: 12). But the nature of this exchange relationship (Steers
and Porter, 1987: 203, emphasis in the original) implies more than an economic
transaction.
Employee reward may be perceived as an effort bargain (Behrend, 1957;
Baldamus, 1961) between the parties to the employment relationship, needing to be
continuously renewed on both sides.
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
s
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
employee reward levels vs labour costs
Pfefer (1998) sought to correct what he termed certain myths that he suggested
managers may incorrectly embrace in thinking about rewarding people employed
in organisations. He was at pains to point out that rates of employee reward are
not the same as the costs of employing someone. It is possible to pay higher rates
of reward to employees compared with a competitor and yet have employment
costs as a proportion of the total costs of running an organisation that are
relatively lower. Te key ingredient is productivity that is, what the employer is
able to achieve in terms of efcient and efective output from the workforce for
each component of a persons capacity to work.
Pfefer (1998) gave as an example the comparative position of two steel mills
where one pays higher wages than the other but keeps the overall cost of
employment at a managerially acceptable level by requiring signifcantly
fewer person-work hours to produce a similar amount of steel. He added that
those managers who subscribe to the frst myth tend to embrace a second
misconception that by cutting salary and wage rates they can reduce their
labour costs. However, as he argued (Pfefer, 1998: 110):
I may replace my $2000 a week engineers with ones that earn $500, but my
costs may skyrocket because the new lower-paid employees are inexperienced,
slow, and less capable. In that case I would have increased my costs by cutting
my rates.
Te problem as perceived in Pfefers (1998) terms implies the need for
managerial interventions active engagement to ensure that not only is employee
reward specifed and determined. Management also is required to ensure that all
parties interested in the efortreward bargain understand what intentions follow
from what is on ofer and what the implications are in what will be rewarded and
how rewards will be delivered.
Reward management may thus be simply dened as the combined actions an
employer may take to specify at what levels employee reward will be offered, based
on what criteria and data, how the offer will be regulated over time, and how both
the intended links between organisational goals and values should be understood
and acted on by the parties to the employment relationship.
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
s
si tuati ng reward management systemi cally
In this book, the reader is ofered a way of situating the problem of reward
management (by which we mean patterned activity to be specifed and
understood, to inform action) within the context of argument and evidence
related to the employment system. In fact the system is multidimensional: it is
at the least one that refects the national and international environment within
Reward Management 6
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
which employees are contracted to work and employers need to manage their
activities. By defnition that system is diverse, and we should not assume that
it is immune to efects from beyond the immediate arena of organisation and
employment. Wider economic, political, social and technological phenomena
set within a historical period, itself afected by past times create a dynamic
setting that employers and the people management specialists who advise them
need to take into consideration when evaluating the alternative approaches to
managing employee reward and the expected return on investment and other
consequences that follow. And employment systems will be encountered at
a variety of levels below the macro level eg industry sector, organisation,
workplace each of which is likely to be just as diverse, refecting the range of
people and situations involved. We discuss the dynamic contexts for reward
management in greater detail in Chapter 3.
Commentary in the human resource management literature frequently refers to
reward (or compensation, pay or remuneration) systems (eg Boxall and Purcell,
2003; Heery and Noon, 2001; Kessler, 2005, 2007; Marchington and Wilkinson,
2005; Milkovich and Newman, 2004; Ulrich, 1997). But as Robert Persig observes
in his classic text Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: Teres so much
talk about the system. And so little understanding. We can fnd little in the
published debates among commentators in the feld that explicitly justifes why
a systems view of employee reward is appropriate, or using ideas that have their
roots in general systems theory (von Bertalanfy, 1969). Tis is despite the fact
that, as Meadows and Wright (2008: xi) point out, Today it is widely accepted
that systems thinking is a critical tool in addressing the many environmental,
political and social, and economic challenges we face around the world.
While pursuing a search for underlying regularities that characterise the world
in general, Ludwig von Bertalanfy a biologist and the founding father of
general systems theory adopted the system as an organising concept to
help overcome diferences between diferent academic disciplines (Burrell and
Morgan, 1979: 58).
A system is formed from elements and parts that are organised and
interdependent (Holmwood, 2006: 587). Systems can be either closed or open.
Closed systems are exemplifed by conventional physics that isolates systems from
their environments for example, the controlled experiment where phenomena
are exposed to testing but isolated from the places in which such phenomena
naturally occur. Closed systems, von Bertalanfy (1969) argues, will by defnition
become independent from their environment, but this will undermine attempts
to understand the system as a dynamic phenomenon in continuous interaction
with other, contextually linked, systems. As Haines (1998) points out, this kind
of reductionist thinking (isolating the elements of a system for analysis to their
most basic trait and then reassembling the answer without consideration for
the inevitable infection that will afect the phenomenon once returned as a
whole to its environment, colliding with other systems) can lead to perverse
conclusions. For example, if we ofer short-term cash incentives to fnancial
services executives, it may be assumed that their resultant behaviour will beneft
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
the frm. However, without moderating factors including acknowledging the
time-lapse between apparent outcomes and actual value creation or destruction,
such hermetically sealed incentive programmes may encourage individuals to act
in ways that, when ignoring risk becomes endemic to this category of employee,
may plunge the whole system into crisis.
In direct contrast to a closed system, an open systems approach draws attention
not just to the structure or substance of phenomena but to the processes that
impact on the system, and its impact in turn on those other systems with which it
interacts. Open systems engage in transactions with their environment, importing
and exporting and changing themselves in the process, continuously building
up and breaking down . . . component parts (Burrell and Morgan, 1979: 59). Tus,
open systems theory ofers a route for studying the pattern of relationships which
characterise a system and its relationship to its environment in order to understand
the way in which it operates and so to discern diferent types of open system in
practice (Burrell and Morgan, 1979: 59; emphasis in the original).
Controversy regarding the use of incentives to reward certain employees in
fnancial services illustrates the potential hazards of regarding a reward system as
closed or self-contained. As is discussed in the second chapter, classic economics
theory on wage determination assumes away environmental factors (or context),
to consider employment market transactions in the abstract, using the all
other things being equal clause. And ideas from psychology such as Vrooms
expectancy theory (also considered in the next chapter) may be seen as drawing
on the systems input-transformation-output-feedback model: an incentive
system may be designed on the basis of assuming that desired behaviour will
result provided the individual can see what is expected, the extent to which
achievement is realistic given available resources, and whether they fnd the
incentive ofered of sufcient value to them. But again, there is a need for caution
in extrapolating from such theorising reduced to the individual disconnected
from the wider social context for example, conditioning what is deemed
valuable and the degree of contribution required and the trust the individual
has in managerial representatives to honour the bargain, derived from prior
interactions with peers and superiors.
Te conceptual lynchpin of systems thinking . . . is that all systems are circular
entities. Tis concept, which is based on the actual nature of systems, is
integral to the input-transformation-output-feedback model that forms the
framework for systems thinking . . .
In viewing our organizations . . . as levels of systems within, and colliding with,
other systems, we align ourselves with the principles of openness, interrelation,
and interdependence, and so cement the systems concept. When problem-
solving, we look for patterns of behavior and events, rather than at isolated
events, and we work on understanding how each pattern relates to the whole.
We begin to see how problems are connected to other problems and are
forced to look at solving those problems in a new light. In fact, the solution to
any systems problem is usually found at the next highest system.
(Haines, 1998: 28391)
Reward Management 8
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Mindful of these factors, suggesting the importance of paying attention to
the hierarchy of systems (or the environment) within which they function,
interpreting reward management systems as open may be more realistic in the
context of the contemporary economy. Organisations and their sub-systems
interact with an increasingly interconnected division of labour across a capitalist
world system (Wallerstein, 1983), in which organisations of diferent sizes and
stages of development enter into a diversity of employment relationships with
people in locations that are also at various stages of development and change.
Consistent with the integrationist HRM approach we discuss in Chapter 12,
within the organisation itself reward management systems may be deliberately
located as in continuous interaction with internal environmental conditions
derived vertically from corporate strategies and horizontally from other people
management structures and processes, not to mention the interactions with
regulatory system expectations introduced to the organisation from the external
political economy. Depending on the viewpoint of the commentator, the direction
of infuence vertically and horizontally is debatable. Nonetheless, ideas from
open systems theory may help encourage refexivity around employee reward.
Whether or not specifcally goal-directed, a reward system may evolve, regress
or disintegrate, not only experiencing change itself but also possibly infuencing
changes to an organisational environment, possibly spilling over into an external
employment and business system in the process.
An example of this may be the arrival of a large multinational corporation in
a developing or transforming economy, where the inward investors and their
managerial agents may introduce practices that begin to reshape a competitive
environment for efortreward bargaining. Choosing between a closed or open
systems perspective has important consequences for the underlying assumptions
accompanying the theories that help to interpret and understand how and why
reward systems function. Teorists debate alternative explanations for adaptation
within and between non-static systems, including provisions for addressing
confict and creating consensus among the actors within the system, underscored
by the institutional context for reward management (see below).
criticisms of systems thinking
Despite the infuence that the systems approach has had on various branches
of management and social science since the mid-twentieth century, systems
theory may be criticised when its users do little more than propose the reduction
of complex phenomena to elements that may be observed and where possible
experimented on, while promising not to forget that in reality the parts must be
considered holistically and in interaction (Burrell and Morgan, 1979).
Within the social sciences, grand theory-building attempts to explain
modern society in systems terms by American sociologist Talcott Parsons
in the 1950s have been criticised for the implicit assumption of converging
values among populations which, given the diversity of people within and
across the worlds nations, lack empirical grounding (Abercrombie et al,
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
2000). A prediction that societies would come to mirror the industrial and
employment system characteristic of the USA (Kerr et al, 1964) has remained
controversial. Important criticisms are associated with the potential of analysts
to confer a self-determining (or reifed) status on socio-economic systems,
over-emphasising systems while neglecting action (Holmwood, 2006). In the
second chapter in this part of the book, for example, we take a critical look at the
classic labour economists view that vests ultimate authority in market forces in
regulating the employee reward system.
Another important criticism has been the argument that social systems theory
is couched in conservative ideology, and lacks the capacity to deal adequately
with the presence of confict and change in social life. Tis latter point may be
answered to some extent by reference back to the more sophisticated project on
which von Bertalanfy embarked. Attention may be paid to sources of infuence,
for example, in settling the terms of the efortreward bargain. Te necessity for
individuals to interpret aspects of both the extrinsic and intrinsic employment
relationship implies that while management, as the keepers of organisational and
employment resources, may enjoy a dispositional advantage in framing the ofer
(Edwards, 1986), the position remains indeterminate (Shields, 2007). Managers
may not be assumed to act consistently, and employees may interpret their roles
in ways that have unforeseen consequences in line neither with the intended
corporate strategic nor a lateral HRM direction.
For the purposes of shaping discussion in the present book, while not ignoring
the limitations of a systems perspective as this may be applied to reward
management, it seems appropriate to remain sensitive to the ways in which
reward management design elements interact with one another, and with other
systemic features observable at various levels of environmental analysis (eg those
connected with managerial strategy and with other human resource management
designs and activity inside the organisation; and with economic markets, and
other institutions, such as the law, shareholders, trade unions, etc, located
externally). In voluntary associations of purposeful members who themselves
manifest a choice of both ends and means to achieve organisational outcomes
(Gharajedaghi, 1999: 12) the parties may be viewed as seeking to regulate the
efortreward bargain, processing information and learning from feedback
mechanisms within an open system setting (Haines, 1998), to modify and refne
their orientation to the employment relationship. It is our contention that what
the CIPD terms thinking HR performers CIPD (2007) will beneft from bearing
this in mind when refecting on theory and practice in connection with reward
management systems.
In summary, we have chosen to focus on open, dynamic systems within which
reward management can be practised (not regarding reward systems as sealed
vacuums to be acted on as though constituting laboratory settings) so as to help
readers of this volume to grasp the fact that more is in play than management as
a process within which to determine predefned outcomes.
Reward Management 10
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
rewardi ng the employment relati onshi p
A fundamental principle associated with designing and administering (another
expression for managing) employee reward is that these activities are undertaken
within a complex set of people and organisational interrelationships a series
of interconnecting systems coinciding around the employment relationship.
Managerially, the intention we may assume is to design reward so that it acts,
in alignment with other features of human resource management, to secure
the strategic intentions of the employer, so as to get things done through
securing and deploying the capacities of people working individually and in
groups. It follows from describing the social context for managing employment
relationships and the reward dimensions, however, that although the intent may
be strategic, the diversity of people and settings logically gives rise to risks that
as people interpret their roles and the intentions of others with whom they
interact outcomes desired by organisational designers and leaders may not
automatically appear in practice.
Whereas organisation leaders may deploy what management guru Peter Drucker
called their theory of the business (aka strategy), managers at each level between
corporate and front line and, in turn, employees generally may apply their
own criteria to work out how to engage with it. And it would be unwise for any
businessperson to assume that the engagement is unfailingly consistent with
corporate intentions. A complex mix of demographic, economic, social and related
circumstances including feelings towards co-workers and managers, including
occupational and professional allegiances act as prisms through which people view
whats on ofer and whats expected of them in return. As we will see throughout
the text, interpersonalorganisational comparative factors impact on sense-making.
Prominent among these are considerations of equity (Does how Im treated feel
fair?), associated with factors such as ethnicity and gender, and cultural norms
and values across social and geographical spaces internationally (How does my
world-view interact with the employer and other key stakeholders?). A high-level
investigation commissioned by the UK coalition government, led by a well-known
economist, Will Hutton, whose interim report was published in December 2010,
has been exploring questions specifcally intended to set some standards for judging
fair pay. And pressure is building for employers to submit to equal pay audits in the
face of a continuing gap between levels of pay enjoyed by men and women in the
UK workforce, and the focus seems set to broaden to questions around equality and
fairness more generally. Te University of Kent has gone so far as to publish its frst
ever equal pay audit, conducted in 2008 (University of Kent, undated):

student ( group) exerci se
Discuss the benefits of approaching the analysis of reward management systems as proposed
above.
Considering the criticisms we have sketched, why do you think a systems approach may have
been popular among social analysts?
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Te purpose of the audit was to help the University identify any pay inequities
arising because of gender. Future equal pay audits will have a wider scope to
also include race and disability. Te recommendations from the report will be
used to assist in reviewing our practices in relation to pay and grading policies
and procedures.
Te scope for what Knights and McCabe (2000) label an interpretative gap
between reward management designs and how people interpret and react to them
is likely, even if at face value the managers and employees espouse a strong sense
of what academic commentators have labelled organisational membership (or
commitment to corporate aims) and citizenship behaviours (helping those with
whom they interact in an unselfsh way). Peoples orientation to work why they
work and the values they bring to the employment relationship and their sense
of vested interest in accepting the ofer of an employment contract, characterised
by each persons demographic as well as economic circumstances are factored
in by managements who understand that the employment relationship is at root
indeterminate (Marsden, 1999).
Managing people purposively in organisations, under an employment
relationship, refects what over half a century ago economist Hilde Behrend
(1957) described as an efort bargain. While the formal agreement to work for
an employer may specify explicit terms, and may be accompanied by statements
that describe the job to be performed, the way the bundles of tasks should be
approached, and the performance expected, in practice a negotiation is taking
place. Tat negotiation may refect the employers strategic expectations. But
it also will be infuenced by the employees interpretation of what is ofered
implicitly as well as explicitly, accounting for psychological and social in addition
to economic exchanges. For example, the extent to which the employee judges
the deal to be worth it to them measured against unique benchmarks, and a
just return on the commitment and capability to work they are investing, in
turn needs to be accounted for in designing the reward proposition (a term we
will explore in the course of these pages, culminating in a chapter on so-called
total rewards) and how it is administered across the variety of people and
settings within which employment (and reward) relationships are to be found.
Te implication is that while these days reward management choices are fairly
extensive, there are limits to the packages and modes of delivery to select from.
Te variety of characteristics attributable to the managers who oversee them
and the employees who are targeted for such interventions (characterised for
instance by age, ethnicity, gender, bodily status and orientation) and the sectoral,
national, regional and global settings inhabited, are in contrast potentially
limitless. Recognising this gives pause for serious refection. What may work to
produce specifc outcomes among one group and in one setting may result in a
completely diferent set of interpretations and outcomes and be accompanied by
the need for variation in how to approach the efortreward bargaining process
when transplanted to people and settings elsewhere.
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
reward management i n medi a headli nes
i
s
s
u
e
s

i
n

r
e
w
a
r
d

1
.
1
In October 2010, the retiring director-general of the UKs employers group the CBI
called for a global ceasere between banks over payments to mega stars. To
avoid a accusations of toxicity at a time of pay freezes and job losses in the public
sector a sense of fair dealing was needed, Mr Lambert said, to rebuild public trust
following the global nancial crisis. Carrying on with business as normal (in the
sense of large bonus payments) would seem arrogant and out of touch, he added.
Only if the sectors employers agreed to act collectively with restraint and not to
poach employees disaffected at seeing their pay levels curtailed could the recipe
for regeneration be successful. Here it may be perceived that political factors are
being expressly privileged alongside economics, with institutional action among
employers collectively running contrary to at least a quarter-century of market
forces rhetoric.
Source: FT.com October 2010, Brian Groom, Business and Employment editor. CBI
chief urges bank bonus ceasere
Executive pay was placed in the foreground of plans announced by the UK
government in October 2010 to overhaul a state-owned private equity investor:
CDC (founded in 1948 as the Colonial Development Corporation). The institution
had been criticised in the tabloid press over the pay and expenses of its top
executives, the Financial Times reported on 12 October. The espoused aim of
the group is to reduce world poverty while making profits. However, critics
suggested that it had lost its way . . . enriching its executives in the process.
Its chief executive a former private sector investment banker earned almost
1 million in 2007, although he had waived part of his bonus in the subsequent
two years, taking home 494,501 in 2009 (while claiming expenses of 7,414).
Although this financial services organisations executives appear to earn
payments well below those reported as awarded to private sector counterparts,
again the political appears to have overshadowed the influence of economic
market forces in securing, retaining and motivating talent. In this case the
situation may be seen as compounded by the fact that the employer ultimately is
the UK government.
Source: FT.com 12 October 2010, Martin Arnold, Private Equity correspondent. CDC
faces shake-up after anger at pay
In another case of a government-funded enterprise acting under criticism for its pay
management at senior levels, in October 2010 the FT reported action by the BBC to
address criticism of excessive management salaries. The pledge reported was to
reduce senior managerial costs by 25 per cent.
Source: FT.com 12 October 2010, Ben Fenton, chief Media correspondent. BBC to
lay off deputy director-general
And reward management controversy is certainly not solely a UK phenomenon. In
Australia on 8 October 2010 the Financial Review reported that about 1,000 people
employed in the states health service protested outside Queenslands Parliament
House for better pay, while inside the building the Health Minister protested in
return that the group were the highest paid in the country, paid $30,000 above
comparator groups in the neighbouring state of New South Wales and $55,000
13
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
i nfluences on employee reward thi nki ng
Much of the literature concerning employee reward is informed by the twin
disciplines of economics and psychology (reviewed in depth in the next chapter).
Our introductory remarks, however, signal the presence not only of phenomena
concerned with macro-economic market transactions and/or individual micro-
perceptions and responses but also of ethical, moral, political, social and
technological factors as well as managerial strategies and responses from
parties to employment systems. Te parties include fnance capital investors,
governments, trade unions, and other stakeholders. Interest groups may adopt
a variety of starting points in their approach to employee reward management
and the way it can be objectively discovered and determined or subjectively
interpreted and socially constructed and deconstructed. Te consequence of this
is that not only do reward systems designers and decision-takers fnd themselves
confronted with conficting prescriptions on how to derive efective consequences
from investment decisions. Tey also encounter alternative ways of thinking
about the subject whether these feature explicitly in the commentary or lurk
implicitly below the surface.
Given the range of factors complementing and supplementing economic and
psychological issues, the search for guidance on how to navigate potentially
conficting, sometimes contradictory, best practice techniques may be usefully
supported by literature assembled by employee relations and HRM analysts,
political scientists, sociologists, strategic management writers and so on (also
reviewed in the theory chapter that follows this introduction. Tese ideas and
concepts require careful interpretation and evaluation. But they may help to
situate alternative reward management principles and practices mindful of the
context in which they have been fashioned and to which the exhortation is to
apply them.
above those in Victoria. This followed rejection of a three-year pay increase of 2.5
per cent.
Source: Australian Financial Review, 8 October 2010. Queensland workers in pay
protest (p. 12)
Just looking at a single weeks business media coverage surfaces a host of
examples that, when examined with the foregoing considerations in mind help
reinforce the challenge signalled. Reward management, whatever else it may
be, isnt easy: and however ideas may be put forward as solutions to reward
problems, the astute HR professional will appraise such abstract commentary
with due caution. Effortreward bargaining as a socio-economic process requires
people to work it out (whether this is through formalised negotiations in collective
settings with intermediaries acting for management and workforce, or in day-to-day
interactions between the supervisor seeking to motivate one or more subordinates
to perform to achieve the supervisors goals, or even by the individual working out
mentally what and how much to do when faced with a remunerated employment
setting).
Introducing the Reward Management System
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Tat is the case whether the context is spatial and/or temporal, related to
organisation and workforce as well as managerial characteristics, and cultural
and/or institutional factors, not forgetting philosophical considerations that set
the scene for what decision-makers and their advisers think is being observed
and acted on, and how knowledge to inform the process is itself constituted.
Observing these principles, it seems to us, the reader will be able to adopt a
thematic and theoretically grounded orientation to the subject, rather than one
overly reliant on techniques (even when technical commentary is informed by
reports of what works and what does not, gathered in real world settings).
employee reward and the employeremployee dyad
issues in reward management
Tree foundational reasons are generally given for the managerial importance
of rewarding employees: the underlying idea is to help organisations and those
who lead them to secure, retain and motivate people (CIPD, 2006a). Employers,
or managers and supervisors acting on the employers behalf, whether they
are in for-proft organisations, government agencies or other not-for-proft
enterprises, ofer reward(s) that may be counted as representing the price for
employing labour, moderated by particular economic market conditions. But
the employment relationship has a complex character. Employees are not selling
their souls as a labour market commodity (Rubery and Grimshaw, 2003: 2)
but a capacity for and a willingness to work. Te relative value of economic
recognition it is deemed legitimate for an individual to expect in employment
is mediated through principles of fairness, equity, justice and respect for the
human condition.
Because reward is about a relationship, the outcome of which is open to the
striking of a bargain (Kessler, 2001), the phenomenon is dynamic and not
wholly subject to unitary managerial design or control. A formal contract may
be entered into between the parties efort for reward but the precise details
of whether and to what extent employee efort matches managerial expectations
remain unpredictable. Managerially, performance management arrangements
may be introduced to try to order the process, but the extent of employees
willingness to co-operate in terms of not only membership behaviour (a decision
to join and stay with an employer) but also task behaviour (complying with
managerial expectations over completing assigned work tasks) and organisational
citizenship behaviour (voluntarily and altruistically acting in ways that exceed
membership and task compliance) is ultimately a function of employee choice
(Shields, 2007).
As we saw in the opening section, infuential voices in reward management
argue that employee reward needs to complement and reinforce a new logic of
organising (eg Lawler, 2000). Under this reasoning, reward management has to
match the criteria for judging an organisation to be efective (ie that it achieves a
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
ft between the need for capabilities in co-ordinating and motivating behaviour
matched to economic market demands, on the one hand, and competencies that
distinguish the organisation from its competitors, on the other). Simultaneously,
efectiveness implies that reward management policies and processes are attuned
to environmental conditions while also retaining a focus on enactment of a
specifc corporate strategy.

self- assessment exerci se*
Draw up a list of factors that employers and employees may hold in common in terms of reward
management, and highlight areas where there is scope for interests to diverge. What are the
implications for day-to-day effortreward bargaining?
* This is the first in a series of two types of activity we invite Reward Management readers to engage in, to help
them in actively thinking through and assessing the argument and evidence presented. This self-assessment
exercise is something that may be undertaken as part of private study; a second set of themes presented at
various points throughout the book under the heading student exercise may be appropriate as a classroom
session or, outside the formal learning environment, informally in conversation with peers or learning sets.
orientations towards workforce members
To develop profciency in thinking about and practising reward management,
it helps to make connections systematically between the alternative approaches
available to practitioners and the consequences of the choices exercised, paying
attention to the context in which decisions will be taken and acted upon.
Given the need to continuously renew the efort bargain, as defned above, one
contextual infuence on choices between alternative reward approaches and
their consequences concerns the dynamic interaction between expectations
among those involved regarding the character of their relationships. Explicit and
implicit managerial orientations towards workforce members enable employees
to perceive how their employer regards them. While it is possible that the
approach may be standardised across an organisation, it is likely that it will difer
to some extent at least between diferent workforce segments/locations/times.
Te commentary organised in Table 1.1 works through these basic orientations,
suggesting possible consequences for the managerial reward agenda.
Te commentary in Table 1.1 illustrates the nature and implications of regarding
workforce members as assets or liabilities on a human capital balance sheet. It
also casts them in the guise of customers for the employment propositions an
organisation might market, or potential allies in a reciprocal partnership (even if
in the fnal analysis the employer retains residual rights over the economic value
created).
In the frst two orientations, employees appear either to be viewed as emotionally
inert, despite recognised potential to add value to organisational activity, or they
are perceived as a source of unwelcome intrusion into an organisational model
that management would rather do without perhaps to replace workers with
mechanisation through investment in physical technology. A third orientation
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Table 1.1 Orientations towards the workforce: reward management implications
Interpretation Issues Reward management
agenda
Employees are our greatest asset
. . . they need to be used efectively
Employees are valuable
objects, but devoid of
feeling, which are operated
by the owner or agent for
maximum utility.
How do we source
compliant objects?
How do we keep them
in prime shape to do our
bidding?
Pump-priming,
instrumental relationship.
Buy on contingency terms.
Service regularly (by service
agent?).
Run to breakdown: refurbish
or write of and replace.
Utility (exploitative)
orientation?
Employees are a liability
. . . they need to be controlled
Employees are debts for
which one is liable, or
troublesome responsibilities,
and therefore need to be
limited, assiduously policed
or expunged.
How do we minimise our
debts?
How do we keep them
under close surveillance?
Wary, possibly antagonistic
relationship.
Minimise cost of debt.
Arms-length relations.
Ensure ability to write
of liability at earliest
opportunity.
Resigned-utility orientation?
Employees are customers
. . . understand and serve them
Employees are independent
beings; they exercise choices
based on logic and emotion.
Tey will ofer loyalty to a
supplier of employment/
reward if they believe the
promise and see results.
What customers do we
want?
What can we (aford to)
supply?
What are the alternatives?
Active supplier role to
continuously renew
an employee-centred
relationship.
Understand customer
preferences.
Honest and transparent
response with specifcation
available.
Regular client relationship
review.
Service orientation?
Employees are corporate allies
. . . develop a mutual success agenda
Employees are independent
beings; they exercise choices
based on logic and emotion.
Tey will ofer commitment
to organisational partners if
they believe in them and see
results in the substance and
process of the efortreward
bargain.
What allies do we need and
desire?
What can we (aford to)
trade?
What are the alternatives?
Active partner role to
continuously renew
a mutually proftable
employment relationship.
Understand allies needs and
priorities.
Honest and transparent
response: accommodation
available?
Regular alliance relationship
dialogue.
Reciprocal commitment
orientation?
Source: adapted from Perkins (2000)
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
follows the conceptual thread that if people really do represent our greatest
assets, the consequence is that the employer needs to fnd ways of selling
an employment brand, implying that employees hold the upper hand in the
transaction. A fourth orientation towards the workforce signals that although
the employer recognises the latent value in people who may be persuaded to
work for the organisation still carrying a risk that the relationship may become
employee-dependent (see eg Pfefer and Salancik, 2003) both parties have
choices open to them.
A mixture of economic and socio-psychological factors may condition the choices.
Rather than risk extrinsic or intrinsic contractual promises the rhetoric of which
may fall short of the reality owing to unplanned circumstances for example,
changes in investment or trading conditions that might undermine the ability to
pay an employer may signal an orientation in which each party to the employment
relationship focuses on the process of reaching an accommodation, involving
continuous and transparent mutual refection on a holistic deal. As Herriot and
Pemberton (1995) argue, this may in turn require a renegotiate or exit orientation on
the part of the employee. But the task open to managerial initiative is one of setting
clear rules of engagement and, by actions rather than words alone, communicating
the potential for an employment relationship founded on mutual trust and respect.
Such employment alliances imply the scope for conficting positions to arise between
the parties perhaps acknowledged as inevitable with a willingness to explore the
room for compromise and (possibly short-term) trade-of to secure the long-term
benefts with which the partnership ideal is imbued by stakeholders.
Tis may all sound rather esoteric: fne in principle but what about the
practice? Two examples may help illustrate issues to be weighed in considering
alternatives and consequences in employer orientations towards employees.
periphery to core
One of the authors served on a large UK National Health Service Trust board
of directors, overseeing a new hospital building project under public/private
partnership commercial terms. To the great concern of employees working
in support services associated with keeping the hospital running day to day
(catering staf, domestics and other ancillary workers), the project plans involved
the TUPE-transfer of their employment to the new private management partner.
A potentially damaging employment relations dispute was averted when the
senior hospital administrators explained to groups of employees afected that,
in all honesty, they would always fnd themselves to be peripheral workers in
efect, liabilities or second-class when viewed against the Trusts clinicians
and nursing professionals. Without necessarily compromising the psychological
contract they believed they had entered into in joining the NHS, they would
remain members of a healthcare partnership, but enhanced by transition to core
workforce status in their new employment relationship.
Te implication was a basis for efortreward bargaining where their interests
were potentially advanced, not only in extrinsic reward but also in terms of scope
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
for recognition, personal and career development, and the sense of involvement.
Irrespective of what transpired, the point is that an employer may fnd decisive
action in this case transferring a workforce segment into an outsourced
arrangement a more satisfactory option on both sides of the efort bargain than
one hampered by half-hearted managerial commitment.
promise meets practice
Te same author undertook an enquiry for a sub-set of the European partners of
a large professional services frm. During the transformation the organisation was
undergoing at the time, an announcement was made by its corporate leadership
with great fanfare on both sides of the Atlantic that, with the explicit intention
of creating conditions in which the frms managerial and professional employees
would adopt the highest-quality service orientation towards clients, the frm
would treat its people as clients too in their employment relationship. Te
investigation involved focus group discussions with a cross-section of managers
and professionals across a fairly wide geographical base, one telling remark
from which might be interpreted as necessitating caution when top managers
consider talking up the employment promise. Te partners treat us as no more
than money-making machines, the researchers were told. Clearly, although no
doubt well-intentioned from the bridge, at deck level crew members received a
distorted orientation signal.

self- assessment exerci se
Two case cameo illustrations have been provided covering the liabilities and customers
segments in Table 1.1. To test your understanding, search for some company annual report and
accounts statements in which the seemingly ubiquitous people as greatest assets declaration
appears in the chairmans statement or similar commentary. Then look for statements embedded
in reports, or in other sources of corporate information (eg company websites and/or analysts
appraisals). To what extent do you find these consistent with the assets principle, or are there
indications of more partnership orientations? You might conduct a similar audit of your own
organisation or one known to you.
Discussion to this point has signalled that management faces a series of
alternatives for approaching reward management as do employees. Various
consequences follow on from adopting one or other mode of engagement with
this complex aspect of organisation and people management. Te consequences
fowing from reward management choices, whether conditioned by tradition or
new logic for organising, may be viewed in terms of the nature of expectations
the parties hold, the quality of the relationships and the underlying principles
regulating their interaction.
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
a few words on our tri parti te taxonomy
Tis book reviews theory and practice associated with reward management
systems interacting with the employment relationship and efortreward
bargain. To create a thematic focus for the discussion of material assembled, the
emphasis throughout is on the alternatives that call for decision-making, carrying
consequences in each case, which may be interpreted in and conditioned by
particular and changing contexts. Before concluding the chapter with a summary
of the books overall content and structure, at this point a short statement is
appropriate on what the authors intend to convey through the alternatives,
consequences and context refrain.
An alternative is located in a proposition containing two (sometimes more)
statements, or ofer of two (or more) things, the acceptance of one of which
involves the rejection of the other(s). Alternative possibilities, alternative
statements of some position, may exist, open to the exercise of choice by social
actors. Decision-takers are required to make selections between alternatives,
electing for one course of action over one or more alternatives. Exercising
choice (the act of choosing) involves preferential determination between things
proposed. A choice may be exercised managerially for example, to reward
employees for time they commit to the employer or on their performance. Each
of the parties has a choice of how to approach the efortreward bargain, and
this is likely to be infuenced by the assumptions and priorities they bring to the
interaction and the nature of the relationship involved.
Being positioned to exercise choice locates decision-takers socially relative to
others and implies, among other things, making judgements to secure the most
favourable (or ft-for-purpose) outcome, to attain something that is worthy of
being chosen, having special value relative to other available options. Choices
are logically followed by consequences: it is an open question whether or not
the decision-takers base their selection between alternatives either on logically
conjectured projections or by reference to empirical evidence of past outcomes,
to assist the process of judgement in pursuit of a preferred outcome (ie one that
is anticipated and accords with the project being pursued by the chooser). Actors
called to exercise choices in terms of the efortreward bargain (managers and/
or employees) may be infuenced by reference to benchmark data on practice
reported elsewhere or experience over time during the course of a particular
employment relationship or employment relations in general. Tey may also be
faced by ideas from advisers and other opinion-formers about what is deemed
ftting or cost-efective in the circumstances.
A consequence may be described as something that follows as an action or
condition, efect or result, from something preceding or antecedent to that
consequence. A consequence following a particular act of choosing may be
considered to be predetermined (ie located within a cause-and-efect relationship).
Where social relations are involved, as in the case of weighing alternatives in
efortreward bargaining, the situation is unlikely to be so clear-cut, however.
While consequences may form a logical sequence starting with a specifc choice,
opening them to logical deduction from certain premises, a caveat is necessary.
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Tat the consequence of an action, or decision to act, may be logically inferred
(involving the exercise of judgement) is suggestive of a position where absolute
certainty may be open to question. Hence, logical deductions may usefully be
tested drawing on an existing pool of relevant empirical knowledge.
Adopting an alternative defnition, choices may lead to outcomes that are
of consequence that is, they are endowed with importance (assumed
consequentiality). Tey have an impact (positive or negative) on the people and
circumstances in which the choice plays out. Te corollary of this assertion is
that scope for systematic refection on inferred consequences prior to action
merits the attention of parties involved in efortreward bargaining, and
those whose role is to advise them, whether as employees, managers, national/
supranational government policy-makers, or other stakeholders in the complex
feld of employee reward. At a minimum, systemic-looped feedback refection
and learning may help improve the quality of judgement exercised under
emergent conditions.
Selection decisions between alternative efortreward bargain approaches do not
occur in isolation. In systems terms, the selections between alternatives by groups
of decision-takers interact with the choices exercised by others, and in each
case their choices may be viewed as refecting particular interests. For example,
managerial decisions to select one reward management strategy and thus reject
others will interact with decision-taking by other groups of managers, as well as
employees who may be the targets of such decision-taking. How alternatives are
weighed and acted on, and the consequences that follow, are open to infuence
from the context (or environment) in which organisations are situated and how it
is interpreted by the parties to the efortreward bargain.
Interaction between the elements perceived as systematically regulating the
employment relationship and efortreward bargain may be theorised as
context-bound or context-free. Reference to context describes action to weave
or sew together contexted phenomena to facilitate interpretation and possibly
explanation. If something is contextual, the implication is of a situation belonging
to the context if not standing in a dependency relation with then at least
infuenced systematically by the context.
Te context for reward management and the alternatives and consequences
associated with its determination may be framed in terms of corporate, national
and international systems. Managerially, the scale and sector of an organisation,
its predominant technological make-up (afecting the balance of emphasis in the
capabilities required to resource operations), its history and the predisposition
of those who lead and make up the general membership may be viewed as
bounding to some extent employee reward policy alternatives deemed legitimate.
Adopting an open systems perspective, external to the organisation, context
is likely to refect the nature of its ownership, and the infuence of the various
stakeholders and other institutions with whom the organisations members may
be perceived to have a relationship such as business partners, investor groups,
state regulators representing a public interest, trade unions, and so on. Also, the
competitive environment, for sources of investment and revenue (not forgetting
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
employee talent), is likely to infuence proftability and the disposition of
management to invest in the efortreward bargain.
It has been remarked that, over two decades, two themes abiding confdence
in the march of globalisation and progress have remained in the foreground
(Franklin, 2006). While uncritical acceptance of this position is to be
discouraged, beyond the internal organisational setting and its immediate
context, as noted earlier, an increasingly signifcant infuence on organisation
systems, and on HRM and reward management systems, is attributed to the
global context. A recurring theme in the literature is the question of whether
or not approaches to employment regulation are converging internationally or
whether they remain divergent, owing to the infuence of culture and institutional
factors within particular national systems (Anakwe, 2002; Katz and Darbishire,
2000; Sparrow, 1999).
Whether or not the organisation employs people across geo-ethnic borders, it
may be argued that regional and global employment systems need to be factored
in to attempts to evaluate the alternative ways of approaching the efortreward
bargain. A common governance architecture for contemporary business systems
may be assumed (Whitley, 2000) that is, capitalist principles inform the basis
on which actors will seek to arrange the afairs of organisations and those of the
national and international systems within which they are situated (Coates, 2000;
Furker, 2005).
Even if it is accepted that capitalism provides the dominant organising logic,
however, alternative varieties of capitalism (Albert, 1992; Hall and Soskice, 2001)
have been postulated, refecting the institutional basis for reaching social peace
as an antecedent of successful economic production (Roe, 2003: 1). Although a
directional convergence around particular sets of policies and practices for the
management of organisations, including efort-bargaining orientations, may be
open to perception, fnal convergence may not be reliably assumed (Tregaskis
and Brewster, 2006). Detailed policies and practices may refect diferent
interpretations of the opportunities and limitations of the global, national and
organisational settings in which choices between alternatives are being made.
Te accent may vary according to the systematic interaction between economic,
historical, legal, political, social and technological factors, in turn afected by
cultural and psychological factors that is, the infuence of socialisation on
decision-makers interpretations of perceived opportunities and limitations.
Te institutional context for reward management is discussed in Chapter 3 and,
specifcally in the case of executive reward, in Chapter 10. In-depth treatment of
the transnational context for corporate governance and knowledge mobilisation
features in Chapter 11, although given its overriding infuence on reward
management considerations an eye for the international dimension will remain
open throughout the volume.
In short, it is our position that understanding reward management will be
assisted by attention to themes systematically arising as the parties evaluate and
act on the range of alternative courses of action open to them and refection,
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
conceptually and empirically, on consequences that may follow from these
choices. In the case of both alternatives and consequences the infuence of
the open systemic context in which alternatives occur and are weighed and
consequences are played out is something that has to be accounted for in drawing
conclusions, which may in turn inform policy and practice.

student exerci se
Consider the argument that, owing to the scale of Western multinationals, their preferences for
determining reward management systems will tend to prevail across the countries in which they
set up operations. To what extent can you build an alternative, or divergence, perspective? Are
the tendencies polar opposites?
chapter summary
In this chapter we have defned reward management (and employee reward),
refecting on the various manifestations, and introduced the concept of the
efortreward bargain and the consequences of applying this theoretical notion
when trying to make sense of interaction between the parties to the employment
relationship. We have introduced a model encouraging refection on the
orientations employers may adopt towards their employees when evaluating
reward alternatives and the consequences implied, positing four possible
scenarios. We have also briefy appraised the merits and criticisms of applying
systems thinking when conceptualising reward management. Commentary on
developments in the corporate, national and international context for reward
management has been briefy appraised to situate alternative reward management
designs and the consequences that may follow from selected applications.
For postgraduate students following a specialist Reward Management module,
the book can be used sequentially. Chapters have been written mindful of
the Performance and Reward elements in the CIPD Profession Map, and we
summarise how the text aligns with them at the beginning of each chapter. We
have designed the content and style of the book to support CIPD-related students
in particular but also, we hope, to be of relevance to other readers interested in
this important subject associated with people at work and their management.
Students of general management and those following fnal-year undergraduate
and postgraduate HRM programmes may fnd it benefcial initially to engage
with Part One, in order to locate selective engagement with subsequent
content, depending on specifc interests or assigned work. Troughout the book
commentary is illustrated, using calls for self-assessment and other exercises,
to inform discussion of issues raised. Te intention is also to assist readers
preparation in addressing examination questions. Case study material appears
at various points to illustrate conceptual arguments. To conclude the present
chapter, an outline plan of the structure and content of the overall text is set out
below.
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
plan of the book
Te book is structured in four parts over 12 chapters, including this Introduction.
part one
Part One deals with concepts, theory and the institutional context for employee
reward management alternative approaches and consequences.
Although conceptual and theoretical frameworks inform the treatment of reward
management throughout the book, in Chapter 2 particular attention is devoted
to the principal attempts to theorise the subject. Acting as a reference point for
what follows in subsequent chapters, models may be identifed drawing on a
multidisciplinary academic literature principally (labour) economics, industrial/
organisational psychology, employment relations, management strategy, and
the sociology of organisations and work. Emerging themes include the extent to
which employee reward is something open to management; assumptions about
people and work motivation under conditions of employment; and the social
and political interactions around the efortreward bargain. Te content of this
chapter also enables us to signal themes traced throughout the volume related
to how notions of equity and social justice, diversity and its management, and
the possible implications of a global economy interact with ideas and practices
making up the reward management feld.
A complementary foundational discussion this time covering the legal and
employment relations environment is presented in Chapter 3. Te material
includes the impact of principal legislation and related regulatory developments
afecting reward management, beyond economic market infuences, along with
the role of collective bargaining where applicable. Te increasing impact of
European legislation on UK reward management systems design is specifcally
considered, illustrating the dynamic nature of the institutional environment for
managing reward.
part two
Part Two introduces and evaluates structures and processes for extrinsic reward
management, describing some of the practicalities of their design and operation.
Te basic architecture of pay systems is the focus of Chapter 4. Descriptions of
and arguments for applying pay structures are examined, including alternative
types of pay structure, and conditions afecting their design and operation.
Many pay structures are underscored by an aspiration to create the conditions
for internal equity. Te objective has become even more important with the
development of anti-discrimination regulatory frameworks. Te concept, role,
alternative approaches and administration of job evaluation are discussed,
together with its impact on pay structures. Debate surrounding job or role
analysis as the basis for structuring pay, as well as questions and practicalities
regarding the alignment of pay structures with external markets for jobs and
people, is appraised.
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
Alternative approaches to base pay determination, salary progression
management and their consequences are reviewed in Chapter 5. Wages systems
and salary systems are compared, as are seniority- or service-related pay versus
pay contingent on inputs (eg skills) or outputs (eg preset target achievement) or
combined under the rubric of contribution-based pay. Te critical part played
by performance management and the centrality of line managers to the process
of managing contingent pay systems is reviewed. Te role of compensatory
payments for working fexibly, in particular beyond contracted basic hours,
administered either in piecemeal form or by applying alternatives such as
annualised hours, is assessed. Te practice of augmenting pay using concepts
such as premiums related to specifc employment markets is also discussed.
Beyond time-based systems, the notion and variety of variable pay (as a
performance-motivating incentive or reinforcement device) is reviewed in
Chapter 6. Short-term and long-term, individual, team and organisational
bonus payments, including proft-related pay and proft sharing, gain-sharing,
as well as equity- (share-)based fnancial participation initiatives that may be
applied to some or all workforce segments are described and evaluated. Te
discussion includes sales bonuses and other incentives for particular workforce
segments.
part three
Part Tree reviews principles, policies and frameworks for non-cash benefts,
deferred remuneration and intrinsic rewards, and alternatives to managing them.
Employee benefts and allowances, and policies for their application, are the
subject of Chapter 7. Typologies of benefts welfare, compensatory or status
and types of benefts single-status and harmonisation, fexible (or cafeteria)
systems are appraised. Te principal employee benefts that may be applied
beyond salary and wages and their roles (eg legal minima versus perks) are
discussed. Te interrelationship between employee benefts and taxation and
social insurance systems which vary signifcantly according to the national
context is reviewed.
Given its increasingly contentious and strategic role within employee reward,
Chapter 8 is devoted to debates around pensions a deferred form of
remuneration. Consideration begins with a discussion of the development and
role of superannuation schemes, situating the topic in a historical perspective,
moving to examination of the contemporary and contested role of the state vs
employers vs private insurance providers in employee retirement provision. Te
main types of pension scheme are introduced, linked to their role within a reward
management programme. Government policy intervention and the future of
pensions provision are also analysed.
Te increasing attention directed towards forms of non-fnancial reward focuses
discussion in Chapter 9. Te concept is defned and related to notions of total
reward, the employment proposition and emerging ideas around employee
engagement, aligning extrinsic reward management with management of the
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
psychological contract. Te question of why this factor may be of increasing
importance in reward management is investigated, accounting for issues such as
employee recognition, workforce diversity and its consequences, as well as career
management and employee involvement initiatives.
part four
Part Four gives specifc attention to rewarding employees who have a direct
infuence on corporate governance, as well as the employee reward implications of
organisational expansion requiring transnational knowledge mobilisation. Finally,
attention turns specifcally to questions around alignment between organisational
strategy, HRM and employee reward management.
Rewarding corporate executives and directors is discussed in Chapter 10. Ideas
on the composition and management of reward for employees occupying senior
managerial roles are reviewed. Tis discussion is complemented by engagement
with the corporate governance and increasingly emotionally charged top pay
debate, including the role of remuneration committees and advisers; executive
incentives (short-term and longer-term approaches, cash- and/or equity-based);
executive benefts and perquisites; contractual conditions; compliance and public
disclosure requirements. Attention is paid to corporate governance developments
following on the controversy about incentive pay in fnancial services and the
outcome of the recent global fnancial crisis.
Developments in international reward management are appraised in Chapter 11.
Factors impacting on the design of transnational reward management systems are
assessed. Questions around globalisation and corporate structure propositions,
focused on knowledge mobilisation, are considered, along with the extent to
which these give rise to standardisation in reward management practice across
multi-local environments, as well as the part played by reward management
systems in supporting employee expatriation programmes. Expatriatelocal
reward management opportunities and threats in the competitive climate for
multinational enterprise are also critically reviewed. Te emerging role of
information technology in communicating and calibrating international reward
practice is introduced.
To conclude the book on an integrative and thematic note, Chapter 12 covers the
reward management-HRM axis. Te growing importance of a strategic approach
to people management in general and reward management in particular, with a
focus on vertical integration along one dimension, complementing horizontal
integration along another, to ensure consistency across the range of people
management policies and practices, is highlighted. Contested literature, where
universal best practice thinking meets more contingency-based and critical
commentary, is reviewed. Roles attributable to the parties to employee reward
management systems in particular, the interface between specialists and line
managers under the HRM rubric are appraised.
nd
Geoff White
Copyright CIPD 2011
N
E
W
S
For a discussion comparing and contrasting prescription, empirical evaluation,
critical materialist and post-structuralist commentary, see Shields, J. (2007)
Managing Employee Performance and Reward: Concepts, practices, strategies.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
For a critical appraisal of debates around the imperatives of reward strategy as
though this were an alternative to managing equity-based factors implicit in the
effortreward bargain, see Kessler, I. (2007) Reward choices: strategy and equity,
in Storey, J. (ed.) Human Resource Management: A critical text, 3rd edn. London:
Thompson: 15976.
For a treatment of employment systems contexts, see Rubery, G. and Grimshaw, D.
(2003) The Organization of Employment: An international perspective. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
e
x
p
l
o
r
e

f
u
r
t
h
e
r

Cipd Reward MNGMT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cipd Reward MNGMT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cipd Reward MNGMT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the main topics covered in each chapter?

What factors impact the design of transnational reward management systems?

A free sample chapter from Reward Management, 2

You might also like