IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legitimacy of team rewards: Analyzing legitimacy as a condition for the effectiveness of team incentive designs


  • Aime, Federico
  • Meyer, Christopher J.
  • Humphrey, Stephen E.


This article illustrates how the legitimacy of pay and evaluation processes in teams affect the effectiveness of team-based incentive designs in organizational work teams. We present a theoretical model of the development of legitimacy in team-based incentive designs and propose that the development of legitimacy for both pay dispersion in teams (i.e., difference in allocations of incentives among team members) and for the use of interdependent evaluations of performance promote team effectiveness. Our model introduces a new perspective to theorize about the conditions under which team rewards are an effective incentive design.

Suggested Citation

  • Aime, Federico & Meyer, Christopher J. & Humphrey, Stephen E., 2010. "Legitimacy of team rewards: Analyzing legitimacy as a condition for the effectiveness of team incentive designs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 60-66, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:63:y:2010:i:1:p:60-66

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. DeConinck, James B. & Stilwell, C. Dean, 2004. "Incorporating organizational justice, role states, pay satisfaction and supervisor satisfaction in a model of turnover intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 225-231, March.
    2. Chebat, Jean-Charles & Slusarczyk, Witold, 2005. "How emotions mediate the effects of perceived justice on loyalty in service recovery situations: an empirical study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(5), pages 664-673, May.
    3. Renn, Robert W., 1998. "Participation's effect on task performance: Mediating roles of goal acceptance and procedural justice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 115-125, February.
    4. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    5. Rau, Devaki, 2006. "Top management team transactive memory, information gathering, and perceptual accuracy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 416-424, April.
    6. Ensley, Michael D. & Pearson, Allison W. & Sardeshmukh, Shruti R, 2007. "The negative consequences of pay dispersion in family and non-family top management teams: an exploratory analysis of new venture, high-growth firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(10), pages 1039-1047, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:jouret:v:87:y:2011:i:2:p:225-241 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:eee:jobhdp:v:142:y:2017:i:c:p:58-70 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Ladley, Daniel & Wilkinson, Ian & Young, Louise, 2015. "The impact of individual versus group rewards on work group performance and cooperation: A computational social science approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2412-2425.
    4. repec:eee:jbrese:v:85:y:2018:i:c:p:226-237 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:eee:jbrese:v:81:y:2017:i:c:p:70-79 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Ryan, James Christopher, 2016. "Old knowledge for new impacts: Equity theory and workforce nationalization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1587-1592.


    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:eee:jbrese:v:63:y:2010:i:1:p:60-66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.