Promise and peril in implementing pay‐for‐performance

By Michael Beer, M. Cannon, James N. Baron, Patrick R. Dailey, B. Gerhart, Herbert G. Heneman III, Thomas A. Kochan, Gerald E. Ledford, Edwin A. Locke. 2004

172 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Management Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/191f8b3e6c4d9964dab54fdf596be6687aad073d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. John R. Deckop
2. C. L. Jurkiewicz
3. Jason D. Shaw
4. S. Rynes
5. I. Fulmer
6. N. Gupta
7. R. Giacalone
8. B. Gerhart

In Management Information Systems

1. B. Gerhart
2. N. Gupta
3. I. Fulmer
4. S. Rynes
5. C. Trevor
6. Anthony J. Nyberg
7. Jenna R. Pieper

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Jason D. Shaw
2. B. Gerhart
3. John R. Deckop
4. C. L. Jurkiewicz
5. R. Giacalone

Citations in the corpus

• Let the evidence speak again! Financial incentives are more effective than we thought (2015, background): “Beer and Cannon (2004), for example, reported on the problems encountered in the implantation of pay-for-performance plans in multiple sites at Hewlett-Packard in the 1990s.”
• 6 Pay and Performance: Individuals, Groups, and Executives (2009, background): “Also, changing plans too often can result in a counterproductive “flavor‐of‐the‐month” perception among employees (Beer & Cannon, 2004 ).”
• Effects of materialism on work-related personal well-being (2010, background): “…of motivation including expectancy (e.g. Vroom, 1964), equity (e.g. Adams, 1965), and reinforcement theories (e.g. Komaki et al., 1996); and evidence from practice has made clear that financial rewards have the potential serve as powerful motivators in the workplace (e.g. Beer and Cannon, 2004).”