2000
DOI: 10.1016/s1053-4822(00)00028-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Explaining Team-Based Pay: A Contingency Perspective Based on the Organizational Life Cycle, Team Design, and Organizational Learning Literatures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…24 Another key contingency is that incentive compensation bonuses should consider the difficulty of the employee's job or other biasing factors such as business conditions, complex tasks, opportunities, unexpected events, constraints, inaccurate reporting and so on. 25 Bonus recommendations should also consider recent changes to the employee's job. For example, this might include whether the employee experienced recent increases or decreases in responsibilities, whether the employee was recently promoted or laterally rotated or whether the employee experienced new or a loss of experienced coworkers.…”
Section: Contingenciesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…24 Another key contingency is that incentive compensation bonuses should consider the difficulty of the employee's job or other biasing factors such as business conditions, complex tasks, opportunities, unexpected events, constraints, inaccurate reporting and so on. 25 Bonus recommendations should also consider recent changes to the employee's job. For example, this might include whether the employee experienced recent increases or decreases in responsibilities, whether the employee was recently promoted or laterally rotated or whether the employee experienced new or a loss of experienced coworkers.…”
Section: Contingenciesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compensation practices must also include employee incentives that reward the search for new solutions (Balkin & Montemayor, 2000;London & Smither, 1999;Mumford, 2000). As the behaviors required for innovating are difficult to identify a priori (Adler & Kwon, 2002), result-or output-based incentives are more useful in managing and rewarding joint contributions (Snell & Dean, 1994).…”
Section: Hrm Practices As Facilitators Of Knowledge and Product Innovmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Roughly 60 euros extra per month is a considerable addition to salary for other members of the team than GPs. To offset “free riders” and to avoid dilution of the incentive, the teams must be relatively small [ 27 ], which fitted well with the present care teams of 16 persons or less. This relatively small size of the care teams (e.g., cells) could have created group pressure motivating the whole team to improve performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%