IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/accper/v13y2014i1p1-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Better‐than‐Average Bias and Relative Performance Pay on Performance Outcome Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Glen Kobussen
  • Suresh Kalagnanam
  • Ganesh Vaidyanathan

Abstract

Drawing on equity and expectancy theories, we hypothesize that the perception of accountants about their ability to contribute relative to a peer (operationalized as the better‐than‐average [BTA] bias) negatively influences their satisfaction with the outcomes of the performance evaluation process (operationalized as performance outcome satisfaction [POS]). We hypothesize further that this negative influence is mitigated by the amount of relative performance pay. We test these hypotheses using data collected from a survey of and an experiment involving 164 entry‐level accountants. We found that in general our participants rated themselves better than the average audit professional and their immediate work associate; that is, they displayed a BTA bias. Moreover, we found that both the BTA bias and performance pay individually influenced POS; we also found a moderately significant interaction effect. In their entirety, the results indicate that the greater an entry‐level accountant believes that she or he is better than average the more likely her or his performance outcome satisfaction will fall. Résumé En s'inspirant des théories de l'équité et des attentes, les auteurs font l'hypothèse que la perception des comptables quant à leur capacité d'apport par rapport à celle de leurs pairs (notion qu'ils définissent comme étant le biais de supériorité par rapport à la moyenne [better‐than‐average—BTA]) a une incidence négative sur leur satisfaction à l'égard des résultats du processus d'évaluation de leur rendement [performance outcome satisfaction—POS]. Les auteurs formulent en outre l'hypothèse selon laquelle cette incidence négative est atténuée par le montant de la rémunération liée au rendement relatif. Ils vérifient ces hypothèses à l'aide de données tirées d'un sondage et d'une expérience menés auprès de 164 comptables débutants. En général, constatent‐ils, les participants à l'étude s'attribuent un classement supérieur à celui de l'auditeur moyen et de leur collègue de travail immédiat, c'est‐à‐dire qu'ils affichent un biais de supériorité par rapport à la moyenne. Ils observent au surplus que le biais de supériorité par rapport à la moyenne de même que la rémunération au rendement ont individuellement une incidence sur la satisfaction à l'égard des résultats du processus d'évaluation du rendement ; ils observent également une interaction d'ampleur modérée. Dans leur ensemble, les conclusions de l'étude indiquent que plus la supériorité du classement que s'attribue le comptable débutant par rapport à la moyenne est grande, plus sa satisfaction à l'égard des résultats du processus d'évaluation de son rendement est susceptible de chuter.

Suggested Citation

  • Glen Kobussen & Suresh Kalagnanam & Ganesh Vaidyanathan, 2014. "The Impact of Better‐than‐Average Bias and Relative Performance Pay on Performance Outcome Satisfaction," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:13:y:2014:i:1:p:1-27
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3838.12022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12022
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3838.12022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rafik Elias, 2006. "The Impact of Professional Commitment and Anticipatory Socialization on Accounting Students’ Ethical Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 83-90, September.
    2. Norman T. Sheehan & Ganesh Vaidyanathan & Suresh Kalagnanam, 2005. "Value creation logics and the choice of management control systems," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 2(1), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Libby, Theresa & Thorne, Linda, 2004. "The Identification and Categorization of Auditors’ Virtues," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 479-498, July.
    4. Strawser, Rh & Ivancevich, Jm & Lyon, Hl, 1969. "Note On Job Satisfaction Of Accountants In Large And Small Cpa Firms," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 339-345.
    5. Clark, Andrew E. & Oswald, Andrew J., 1996. "Satisfaction and comparison income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 359-381, September.
    6. Jordi Blanes i Vidal & Mareike Nossol, 2011. "Tournaments Without Prizes: Evidence from Personnel Records," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1721-1736, October.
    7. Bullen, Maria Lombardi & Flamholtz, Eric G., 1985. "A theoretical and empirical investigation of job satisfaction and intended turnover in the large CPA firm," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 287-302, July.
    8. Norris, Dwight R. & Niebuhr, Robert E., 1984. "Professionalism, organizational commitment and job satisfaction in an accounting organization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 49-59, January.
    9. Merchant, Kenneth A. & Van der Stede, Wim A. & Zheng, Liu, 2003. "Disciplinary constraints on the advancement of knowledge: the case of organizational incentive systems," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 251-286.
    10. Ross, Tl & Bomeli, Ec, 1971. "Comment On Accountants Job Satisfaction," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 383-388.
    11. Suhaimi Sudin, 2011. "Fairness Of And Satisfaction With Performance Appraisal Process," Journal of Global Management, Global Research Agency, vol. 2(1), pages 66-83, July.
    12. Colin Green & John S. Heywood, 2008. "Does Performance Pay Increase Job Satisfaction?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 75(300), pages 710-728, November.
    13. Parker, Robert J. & Kohlmeyer, James III, 2005. "Organizational justice and turnover in public accounting firms: a research note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 357-369, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emily Breza & Supreet Kaur & Yogita Shamdasani, 2018. "The Morale Effects of Pay Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 611-663.
    2. Green, Colin P. & Heywood, John S., 2010. "Profit sharing and the quality of relations with the boss," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 859-867, October.
    3. Camelia M. Kuhnen & Agnieszka Tymula, 2012. "Feedback, Self-Esteem, and Performance in Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 94-113, January.
    4. Gosnell, Greer & Metcalfe, Robert & List, John A, 2016. "A new approach to an age-old problem: solving externalities by incenting workers directly," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84331, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Richard Murphy & Felix Weinhardt, 2020. "Top of the Class: The Importance of Ordinal Rank," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(6), pages 2777-2826.
    6. Budría, Santiago, 2012. "The shadow value of employer-provided training," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 494-514.
    7. Getinet A. Haile, 2015. "Workplace Job Satisfaction in Britain: Evidence from Linked Employer–Employee Data," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 29(3), pages 225-242, September.
    8. repec:lan:wpaper:3169 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2005. "Socio-Economic Differences in the Satisfaction of High-Pay and Low-Pay Jobs in Europe," MPRA Paper 16733, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Aug 2009.
    10. Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert & Souverijn, Michiel, 2017. "Team Incentives, Task Assignment, and Performance: A Field Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 11228, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Reyniers, Diane, 2018. "Peers and productivity: Evidence from an experimental factory," MPRA Paper 91215, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Gjedrem, William Gilje & Kvaløy, Ola, 2020. "Relative performance feedback to teams," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    13. repec:lan:wpaper:3014 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. repec:lan:wpaper:2920 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Madeline Domino & Stephen Wingreen & James Blanton, 2015. "Social Cognitive Theory: The Antecedents and Effects of Ethical Climate Fit on Organizational Attitudes of Corporate Accounting Professionals—A Reflection of Client Narcissism and Fraud Attitude Risk," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 453-467, October.
    16. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2009. "Confronting Objections to Performance Pay: A Study of the Impact of Individual and Gain-sharing Incentives on the Job Satisfaction of British Employees," MPRA Paper 14244, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. C Green & J S Heywood, 2007. "Are flexible contracts bad for workers? Evidence from job satisfaction data," Working Papers 590927, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    18. Cristina Bernini & Alessandro Tampieri, 2023. "Much Ado about Salary: A Comparison of Monetary and Non-Monetary Components of Job Satisfaction," Working Papers - Economics wp2023_06.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    19. Colin P. Green & John S. Heywood & Parvinder Kler & Gareth Leeves, 2018. "Paradox Lost: The Disappearing Female Job Satisfaction Premium," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 484-502, September.
    20. Konstantinos POULIAKAS & Ioannis THEODOSSIOU, 2010. "Differences in the job satisfaction of high-paid and low-paid workers across Europe," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 149(1), pages 1-29, March.
    21. K. Pouliakas & I. Theodossiou, 2009. "Confronting Objections To Performance Pay: The Impact Of Individual And Gain‐Sharing Incentives On Job Satisfaction," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(5), pages 662-684, November.
    22. Hugh Gravelle & Matt Sutton, 2009. "Income, relative income, and self‐reported health in Britain 1979–2000," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 125-145, February.
    23. Seunghee Yu & Chung Choe, 2021. "Gender differences in job satisfaction among disabled workers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-16, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:13:y:2014:i:1:p:1-27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3838 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.