Fostering strategic renewal: monetary incentives, merit-based promotions, and engagement in autonomous strategic action

Linder, Stefan

doi:10.1007/s00187-015-0227-9

Cited by 9 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To address the issue of inconsistent and contradictory findings pertinent to the actual function for innovative behaviour enhancement in the knowledge-intensive context, the social cognition paradigm transcends the conventional perspective that financial incentive contains only materiality and economic exchange attributes (Gangopadhyay, 2017;Leana and Meuris, 2015;Levitt and Neckermann, 2014;Linder, 2016;Merriman, 2017). According to social cognition scholars, sociality and social exchange attributes of financial incentive exert long-term influence on organisational behaviour of knowledge workers (Kosfeld et al, 2017;Leana and Meuris, 2015;Levitt and Neckermann, 2014;Merriman, 2017).…”

Section: Social Exchange Attributes Of Financial Incentivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the social cognition paradigm, financial incentive does not necessarily contain only materiality and economic exchange attributes that accentuate egoistic calculation and piecemeal transaction (Gerhart and Fang, 2015;Kosfeld et al, 2017;Leana and Meuris, 2015;Levitt and Neckermann, 2014). Sociality can also be imbued into the provision of financial incentive constituting social exchange attributes, which feature mutual trust, mutual care, interdependence, reciprocity and fairness (Gangopadhyay, 2017;Shaw and Gupta, 2015;Linder, 2016;Merriman, 2017). With sufficiency of social exchange attributes, financial incentive reflects symbolic incentive meaning forging symbolic representation of performance feedback; socio-psychological processes of financial incentive receivers are activated to a greater extent subsequently, thus enhancing their innovative behaviour (Amabile and Pratt, 2016;Gerhart and Fang, 2015;Kosfeld et al, 2017;Leana and Meuris, 2015;Merriman, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Innovative behaviour of knowledge workers and social exchange attributes of financial incentive: implications for knowledge management

Tsai

2018

JKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Enhancing the innovative behaviour of knowledge workers is a main task in knowledge management. The pay-for-performance policy is one of the management practices for innovative behaviour enhancement and has been gaining popularity in the knowledge-intensive context. However, it is still uncertain whether such practice really enhances the innovative behaviour of knowledge workers. To address this issue, this paper aims to propose and verify a conceptual framework incorporating kernel notions of social exchange, psychological empowerment and work engagement rooted in the social cognition paradigm. Design/methodology/approach The current study conducts a survey on 608 knowledge workers and their supervisors, validating the model structure and causal path pattern of the proposed framework. The causality is delineated from social exchange attributes of financial incentive, psychological empowerment and work engagement to innovative behaviour of knowledge workers. Findings Perceived organisational support and perceived pay equity are primary antecedents of symbolic incentive meaning reflected in the financial incentive of the pay-for-performance policy. Symbolic incentive meaning comprising dimensions of relative position, control and personal importance relates positively to innovative behaviour of knowledge workers. Psychological empowerment and work engagement are partial mediators of the positive relationship. Originality/value The current study explicates why and how social exchange attributes of the financial incentive provided by the pay-for-performance policy may enhance innovative behaviour of knowledge workers. Implications are supplied to knowledge management scholars and practitioners to optimise the pay-for-performance policy for innovative behaviour enhancement.

show abstract

Section: Social Exchange Attributes Of Financial Incentivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovative behaviour of knowledge workers and social exchange attributes of financial incentive: implications for knowledge management

Tsai

2018

JKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our measurement of autonomous and controlled motivation relies on the motivation at work scale by Gagné et al (2015Gagné et al ( , 2010, which has been used in previous vignette experiments (Kunz 2015;Kunz and Linder 2012;Linder 2016). The wording of single items was slightly modified to account for our specific experimental context.…”

Section: Motivation Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The psychological effects of centrality bias: an experimental analysis

Trapp

2018

J Bus Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the psychological mechanisms that are activated by centrality bias in the context of subjective performance evaluation. Centrality bias refers to compressed evaluations of subordinates, implying that the variance in the performance of the evaluated employees is higher than the variance in the rewards determined by the superior. Based on insights from the social psychology literature, we argue that centrality bias may trigger different psychological mechanisms which affect the subordinates' willingness to exert work effort. We propose that these effects differ depending on whether employees are above-average or below-average performers. In line with our predictions, we detect a considerable asymmetry in the effects of centrality bias. In particular, we find that the relationship between centrality bias and the willingness to exert work effort is negatively mediated by controlled motivation and procedural fairness perceptions for above-average performers. For below-average performers, we find that centrality bias is positively related to procedural fairness perceptions which are, however, unrelated to the willingness to exert work effort. In addition, we shed light on the role of peer information and find that its disclosure has not a significant impact on the psychological mechanisms at work.

show abstract

“…Evidence is scarcer with respect to the impact of planning, budgeting, cost accounting, and incentive systems on ASA. Firms' incentive systems have not been found to matter for the level of ASA [46].…”

Section: Antecedents To Autonomous Strategic Actionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Middle Managers’ Engagement in Autonomous Strategic Actions: Does It Really Matter How Top Managers Use Budgets?

Linder

Torp

2017

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Fostering middle managers' entrepreneurial behavior is a key concern for established firms. Budgets are one of the most widely used management tools in organizations and several conceptual articles claim that the way in which they are usedmost notably, an interactive way -affects middle managers' autonomous strategic actions (ASA). This type of entrepreneurial behavior in established firms focuses on opportunities outside the firms' currently served product-market domains. Using structural equation modeling (SEM) and a formative measurement instrument for interactive use of budgets, we test these claims advanced in conceptual literature within a broad sample of large firms. We find that the way in which budgets are used does not significantly impact middle managers' engagement in ASA. In contrast, firms' boundary systems and middle managers' autonomy seem important antecedents to ASA. [130 words]Keywords: budgets; interactive use; autonomous strategic action; middle managers Managerial Relevance Statement. Budgets are one of the most widely used management tools in organizations and several conceptual articles claim that the way in which budgets are used influences the level of a particular type of intrapreneurship: middle managers' autonomous strategic actions (ASA). This type of intrapreneurship focuses on new business opportunities by introducing new products to new markets. An interactive way of using budgets has been suggested to foster such intrapreneurial behaviors. Since fostering middle managers' entrepreneurial behavior is a key concern for many established firms today, and as managers can choose the way in which they use budgets, testing these claims empirically has high practical importance for advising engineering management. We draw on a broad sample of large Danish firms to test these claims for the use of annual budgets. 2In contrast to views advanced in conceptual literature, our results suggest that the way annual budgets are used does not significantly impact the level of ASA. Rather, it is boundary systems and middle managers' autonomy which significantly affect the level of such intrapreneurship. Our findings thus provide advice to engineering managers on where to look in order to promote intrapreneurial behaviors. [190 words]

show abstract

Fostering strategic renewal: monetary incentives, merit-based promotions, and engagement in autonomous strategic action

Cited by 9 publications

References 83 publications

Innovative behaviour of knowledge workers and social exchange attributes of financial incentive: implications for knowledge management

Innovative behaviour of knowledge workers and social exchange attributes of financial incentive: implications for knowledge management

The psychological effects of centrality bias: an experimental analysis

Middle Managers’ Engagement in Autonomous Strategic Actions: Does It Really Matter How Top Managers Use Budgets?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About