Author
Listed:
- André de Waal
- Paul Jansen
Abstract
Purpose - The ongoing debate about the effects of bonuses on managers’ performance and the role of reward systems in organizations has still not led to a unanimous conclusion among academics and practitioners. Those in favor of bonuses state that applying bonuses and putting emphasis on monetary rewards increases productivity and organizational performance, while those against bonuses claim that use of bonuses and monetary rewards leads to counterproductive results. A key question often overlooked in the discussion is: How important is handing out bonuses for an organization to become and stay successful for a longer period of time? This paper seeks to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach - This paper describes the results of research into the characteristics of “high performance organizations” (HPOs) and the role of bonuses and reward systems in creating and maintaining HPOs. Findings - The research results show that use of bonuses or implementation of certain types of reward systems have neither a positive nor a negative effect on organizational performance. This may be explained by the fact that reward systems are a hygiene factor for an organization. If an organization does not have an appropriate reward system (whether or not including bonuses), it will run into trouble with its employees and have difficulty improving its performance. If it does – a situation which employees expect and consider to be normal – it can start working on becoming an HPO. Originality/value - The results of this study further the discussion about the role of bonuses.
Suggested Citation
André de Waal & Paul Jansen, 2013.
"The bonus as hygiene factor: the role of reward systems in the high performance organization,"
Evidence-based HRM, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 1(1), pages 41-59, April.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ebhrmp:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:41-59
DOI: 10.1108/20493981311318601
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:eme:ebhrmp:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:41-59. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.