What is the relationship of the intrinsic rewards to the

What is the relationship of the intrinsic rewards to the

Employee performance is a critical part in the efficiency of every organization in pharmaceutical industry in particular. This research proposal aimed to examine the impact of a rewards system on employees productivity. AB.F Skinners Operant Conditioning is used as the researchs theoretical background. Other theories were used to support the arguments and findings in this paper such as Adams Equity Theory and Alderfers ERG Theory. Quantitative approach is used as the primary method for data collection and analysis. The research findings of this research study indicate that there exist a strong positive correlationship between incentive and rewards program at pharmaceutical industrys HR department and productivity performance and satisfaction.TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.. iiDECLARATION.. iiiABSTRACT.. ivCHAPTER # 1: INTRODUCTION.. 1Research Rationale. 3Purpose of the Research. 3Research Questions. 3Research Hypothesis. 3CHAPTER # 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 5Theoretical Framework. 6Satisfaction. 7Rewards. 10Workers Performance in Reward Consideration. 11Challenges in Searching for the Right Criteria for Performance Based Rewards. 14Performance. 17Effectiveness. 20Efficiency. 22Satisfaction and Productivity. 23CHAPTER # 3: METHODOLOGY AND METHODS. 26Research Design. 26Population. 26Sampling and Sampling Procedures. 26Procedures for Recruitment 27Instrumentation. 27Data Analysis. 27Ethical Procedures. 28CHAPTER # 4: FINDINGS. 30Introduction. 30Analysis of Survey. 30Hypothesis Testing. 35Correlation Analysis. 36Summary. 37CHAPTER # 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION.. 39Conclusion. 40Recommendations for Future Research. 42REFERENCES. 44
CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION
Employee productivity plays an important role in the organizations performance. Therefore employees should enhance their productivity. Many businesses today believe that empowering employees will improves productivity and will provide significant benefits in the future. This philosophy is based on the theory that employees are empowered through making decisions which makes them feel capable reliable and dedicated to work more effectively and efficiently and in a good business practices especially employees become more productive. A company or organization that empowered their employees would definitely outperform their competitors.Employee must take part in the company by determining the quality defects it has and ways to develop the efficiency of its employees. This philosophy the company adopts regarding this will establish its quality because employee empowerment and quality would enable companies to become well-established in their respective business ventures. Furthermore the entrepreneurial process involves all types of functions and activities related in identifying and exploring opportunities. In fact employee empowering is an instrument in combating poverty and unemployment because of process of job creation and long-term economic growth that is widely recognized.In several organizations policy-makers and practitioners tend to intervene in order to stimulate the business industry as a mean of promoting economic well-being. In addition business interventions are necessary to address resource attitudinal strategic and operational barriers to the renewal of company performance. A wide variety of interventions have been introduced to encourage new forms of growth such as Business Ownership Experience Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Performance: Novice Habitual Serial and Portfolio Entrepreneurs.By definition rewards refer to all forms of benefits financial returns receive by the employee as part of the employment relationship. Rewards are benefits received arising from rendering or performing a task and taking on responsibility. There are two types of rewards: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic rewards refer to psychological and intangible rewards which can be in the form of recognition which boosts employees intrinsic motivation. Another type is the extrinsic rewards which refer to tangible and financial rewards such as pay interpersonal rewards benefits and bonuses.The reward package has an impact on employees performance. Based on the research and findings of Partheepkanth and Yapa a reward system helps increase an employees performance by improving the employees skills abilities and knowledge to obtain the organization objectives. A reward practice plays an important role in enhancing an employees performance in order to achieve organizational objectives. Many researchers have determined that employee rewards is directly attach to employee performance. They also indicate that in organizations that do not reward employees the employees performance may decrease. An effective reward system can serves as a tool to motivate while an inefficient reward system can result in demotivating them.. In terms of employees internal conflict high turnover lack of commitment or loyalty lateness and felling grievances are some examples of problems that indicate that organizations need to create or develop a strategic reward system for employees to retain proficient employees that could result achieving a sustainable competitive advantage.
Research RationaleThe primary goal of this research is to determine the relationship of a rewards system to employee productivity. It seeks to identify how the rewards system affects the productivity of employees in a typical pharmaceutical company.
Purpose of the ResearchThe purpose of this study is:To identify the relationship between rewards and employee productivity in a typical pharmaceutical company;To examine the effectiveness of the reward system; andTo give some recommendations on how the pharmaceutical company would improve their existing rewards system.Research QuestionsWhat is the relationship of the existing rewards system to the productivity of employees?What is the relationship of the extrinsic rewards to the productivity of employees?What is the relationship of the intrinsic rewards to the productivity of employees?Research HypothesisH1: There isnt a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and performance.H2: There is a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and satisfaction.
Recent studies have revealed that reward system has direct impact on job satisfaction and performance of employees (Pratheepkanth) (Yapa).CHAPTER TWOLITERATURE REVIEW
Recent studies have revealed that reward system has direct impact on job satisfaction and performance of employees (Pratheepkanth;Yapa). Adams Equity Theory talks about the balance between the employees input and output. This theory helps a person asses and projects properly in regards to their relationship with their work and their employer. This also implies that motivation is based on these variables. The employees input are being hard working performing on high level of skills tolerance to changes and unpredictable work situations loyalty to the company and the superior commitment to work determination enthusiasm trust support of colleagues and personal sacrifices. The outputs are compensation which covers incentives are salary and number of days or times of work. This also includes recognition reputation responsibility sense of achievement praise stimulus sense of growth and job security. The problem with this theory is that demotivation happens if the employee feels that their input is not equal to their output.The theory that Alderfers ERG indicates that where ERG corresponds to Existence needs Relatedness needs and Growth needs. This theory deals with organizational motivation where the company or the manager handle the employees depending on their need. The first one is Existence needs which are focused to the physiological and physical needs of a person. This includes the need for food shelter and safety in the work place. The second one is Relatedness needs this includes the need to interact with others receive recognitions and to feel the security with other people. Lastly is the Growth need where a persons self esteem is hinged on their achievements and personal goals.The theorys essence is not to provide every need because in reality the needs are over powering each other. If one of the needs is emphasized and satisfied the other need is blocked. There are also phases that are considered in this theory such as progression and regression. The progress on the needs should be in proper sequence where the first need is the existence needs which progresses to relatedness needs and in turn progressing to growth needs. Progression is the increase of needs according to the needs and it is measured through the length of stay on the company. If the sequence is going backwards it is called regression of needs. But the reality of the theory is that there is no sequence followed by the needs because it will be focused on what is currently satisfying the person.
Theoretical FrameworkAB.F Skinner is known as the father of Operant Conditioning. His work is based on Thorndikes law of effect thus his theory is like an addition to this. His term for the law of effect is reinforcement. He states that behaviour that is reinforced will most likely be repeated while behaviour that is not will most likely be extinguished. There are two basic concepts in operant conditioning:(1) reinforcement and(2) punishment (Adler-Tapia 2012 48).Reinforcement is defined as the event that strengthens or increases the behaviour that it follows. Skinner states that there are two kinds of reinforcers. Positive reinforcers as events add outcomes that are favourable. They are presented after the behaviour. In other words situations that reflect positive reinforcement adds something favourable which will strengthen the behaviour. These can be in the form of praise affirmation or rewards (Adler-Tapia 2012 23).Negative reinforcers remove an unfavourable event or outcome after the behaviour is displayed. The perfect example of negative reinforcement is the famous Skinner box. Skinner placed a rat in the box and exposed it to an unpleasant electric current. When the rat moves about the box it would accidentally knock the lever which would switch off the electricity. After discovering this the rats learned to go straight to the lever. The consequences of getting rid of the discomfort made them repeat the action again and again.Punishment on the other hand is giving an adverse event that would cause the behaviour to decrease or be eliminated. Skinner proposed two types of punishment positive and negative. Positive punishment is referred to as the punishment by application which involves the presentation of an unfavourable event in order to weaken the response. Negative punishment is regarded as the punishment by removal wherein a favourable outcome is removed after the behaviour is executed (Adler-Tapia 2012 18).
SatisfactionSatisfaction is a vital part in every employees life. Companies should pay attention to whether they are responding to their employees needs or not. In Maslows concept of hierarchy of needs it was stated that lower level needs must be satisfied first or at least relatively satisfied before higher level needs become motivators. According to him needs could be arranged on a hierarchy with each ascending step representing a higher need but one less basic to survival. Lower needs must be satisfied first. Anyone motivated by esteem or self-actualization must have previously satisfied needs for food and safety. Maslow has arranged the following needs in order of their prepotency: physiological safety love and belongingness self-esteem and self-actualization.This concept is helpful as it can be a guide for the management to know what should be prioritized for their employees and through this study the needs of the employees are identified. The management will also develop the idea on what can motivate its employees and improve their performance at work (Cardy & Leonard 2014 14).However in the case of pharmaceutical HR department things may be a little different. There are several factors that are being considered in measure for job satisfaction. In an article written by Litherland shift ability and reward are just three of the factors to be considered. In services that should be available any minute a guest asks for it shifting has become a way to meet this demand. Hence employees who work in the shift they prefer are more satisfied. Ability is another factor. If one is given the tasks which he/she knows one can accomplish well because of the abilities he/she has one is more likely to be satisfied than those who are given tasks they dont even know how to accomplish. Lastly reward is also a factor that is being looked into which could affect job satisfaction. Of course those who receive a more competitive pay tend to be more satisfied than those who work for places that cannot give as much pay as others. But still just like with the other articles given above extrinsic factor such as salary isnt the sole source of job satisfaction. Just like other employees workers also need to feel a sense of achievement to be truly satisfied with their job (Mohammed & Eleswed 2013 43).Satisfaction can predict the better commitment among employees. In the study conducted in the University of Rochester by Leone findings support the positive role of the work climate in predicting higher order need satisfaction. In return this predicts higher work engagement. Higher order need satisfaction also predicted job satisfaction self-esteem and psychological adjustment. This means that employees need a good working climate. This could refer to the working area itself people they deal with and the load of work they have to do in a day. If employees find their working climate healthy and bearable it can be expected that theyll be able to carry out the tasks they are expected to do.To Buchanan job satisfaction is a complex matter to discuss . He agrees that there are different types of job satisfaction intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic job satisfaction refers to the satisfaction experienced by employees from the kind of work they do. Extrinsic job satisfaction refers to the feeling of satisfaction considering the conditions of work such as pay co-workers and supervisor. These two types are different from each other yet they play an important role in identifying factors that could make an employee feel good or bad about their jobs. According to him this can mean different things to different people. Although it is usually linked to motivation the nature of relationship between job satisfaction and motivation to perform well at work is not clearly defined because job satisfaction is more of an attitude an internal state wherebye a feeling of achievement usually defines job satisfaction.Meanwhile in an article posted by Mayo Clinic it was stated that it is important to understand the link between work approach and job satisfaction. Three approaches were discussed in this article. First it is a job if one focuses more on the financial rewards he gets from it. It is a career if one is more interested in the advancements he might. Money could be just a second priority rather it is the status prestige and power that is being sought for. Finally it is a called if one is after the nature of work itself. Financial rewards and advancements has no importance in this type of approach. To be able to identify ones satisfaction towards a job he must be able to know in himself how he actually approaches a job.RewardsDespite many years of research studies differences of opinion still exist on whether or not a reward can be a motivator in improving the performance of workers. Some say that implementing a reward program is beneficial for the organization to improve productivity while other believes that it harms the organization (Kohn 1993; Murphy 2007). One the one hand Kohn (1993) suggests that implementation of a reward program is detrimental to the organization as it breaks the team effort by creating a competitive environment among workers in the workplace. He further argued that it can only be a short-term solution if the problem is reduced productivity: after some years of a reward program all workers would start expecting to be rewarded even for average performance (Wong 2012 14).On the other hand many other researchers have concluded that productivity is increased when workers are rewarded based on their performance (Shrestha 2011 13). They suggested that workers who are rewarded are willing to put more effort into their work. Rewards can boost the morale of the workers (Nyaanga 2012 33). Louka (2011) conducted a survey of 860 participants in a study of hotel casino employees and found employees to be more satisfied if their work was recognized leading to a reduced level of turnover. Each year the United States spends around $7 billion on non-cash incentives; and the total estimated amount of spending on rewards is around $114 billion per annum if all cash incentives are included (Mecha 2013 36).Lemmons (2014) reported that by using an incentive system in one plant division the average labour productivity increased by 68% the rate of defects in finished goods is decreased by 95% and material waste was reduced by 44%. In addition to these results the rate of absenteeism decreased by an average of 47% and turnover decreased by 67%. Several researchers have also reported increases in production when workers were rewarded for their performance. Researchers believe that while rewards are based on performance workers are not only motivated to produce more but also try to learn more productive ways to perform their tasks (Griffin 2012 53).Rewarding employees for their efforts and achievements is one of the prime motivators (Coblio 2011 23). The attraction of rewards activates desired behaviours and inhibits the undesirable ones. Carafa (2011) found a 45% improvement in performance when providing team incentives and 27% increase in performance when providing individual incentives. The study also found significant improvement in ones intrinsic interest in work tasks when effective monetary incentives were provided to the employees thereby rejecting the claim of previous research that tangible incentives destroy the intrinsic interest in work making workers have a more money grabbing mentality (Carafa 2011 35).
Workers Performance in Reward ConsiderationAn empirical research indicated the existence of a positive relationship between task performance and contextual performance (Brown 2012 35). Although both types of performance positively contribute to performance evaluation most studies have suggested that the relationship between task performance and employee rewards is fairly straight forward (Askar 2010 34). On the other hand the relation between contextual performance and rewards can be different depending on the value given to the task and contextual performance criteria (Pratheepkanth 2011 92). Mohammed & Eleswed (2013) claimed that contextual performance is not directly recognized by a formal reward system. However Griffin (2012) argued that both contextual and task performance seem to be considered equally in evaluating overall performance.The relationship between reward and contextual performance can be negative or positive depending on the consideration of contextual performance for rewards (Coblio 2011 23). Coblio (2011) further emphasized that contextual performance behaviour is not directly recognized by the formal reward system; thus these behaviours may or may not be rewarded by supervisors. In a study of university professors Brown (2012) found that the reward was based mainly on task performance rather than contextual performance; and there existed negative relationships between contextual performance and rewards. Brown (2012) also found that task performance was more influential than contextual performance. Furthermore he concluded that if task performance is low overall ratings are also low regardless of the contextual performance level. He further emphasized that supervisors were more interested in task performance information than in contextual performance information; however the result may be different in other sectors depending on the nature of the work.Some researchers have argued that contextual performance is not linked to the formal reward system. As contextual performance is not included as part of formal role requirements it is not rewarded through the formal organizational evaluation and reward systems. It does however promote the effective functioning of the organization (Wong 2012 14). Moreover many reward systems only consider task performance for evaluating their workers potentially creating dissatisfaction in the performance evaluation process. If the reward system does not consider contextual performance behaviours then spending time on this performance could have negative consequences for individuals (Nyaanga 2012 33). Thus workers may start ignoring contextual performance.An organization however cannot function properly unless the behaviours supporting organizational goals are rewarded (Mecha 2013 36). Contextual performance is more important in situations where work is based on team performance such as the construction industry and where more willingness is needed to exert effort. Many researchers have indicated that involving contextual performance is beneficial for both organizations and individuals as it makes the organization function effectively. Thus rewards should be redefined to include these behaviours (Louka 2011 24). Consideration of contextual performance in the reward process is important in the construction industry as individuals performance does not only depend upon the individuals job knowledge skills and abilities but also on other team members skills and their behaviour on the work site. Taking in account contextual criteria in a performance appraisal helps to include situational constraints and avoid opportunity bias which occurs when workers achieve differing levels of performance due to factors beyond workers control (Askar 2010 34).In an organizational setting it is not sufficient for workers to have the skills and knowledge to perform the task but they must have the willingness to use these skills to accomplish the organizations goal. Without adequate motivation to use their skills the capability of workers does not matter. Workers must also communicate follow instructions from supervisors help co-workers and coordinate with each other to accomplish the job. These activities are necessary to reduce interdepartmental friction and help workers to perform the job (Lemmons 2014 36).Workers may know how to accomplish a task but may not necessarily be motivated to accomplish it effectively and efficiently resulting in less effort being put into the work. The behaviours and attitudes of workers are measured through contextual performance which includes both interpersonal dimensions and motivational elements that are necessary to accomplish the job successfully in an organizational setting (Wong 2012 14). Including contextual behaviour in the performance evaluation criteria for rewards is recognition that working in an organization is different from working alone (Shrestha 2011 13).
Challenges in Searching for the Right Criteria for Performance Based RewardsFor centuries managers have been attempting to find the right mix of performance evaluation criteria that reduce turnover and improve satisfaction and thus the productivity of workers. Nyaanga (2012) reported that there are mainly three problems that make it difficult to identify the correct set of performance criteria:i) supervisors perceptions with regard to the cause-and-effect relationship of their actionsii) the variability of preferences over time andiii) the organizations pursuit of contradictory preferences.Organizations should maintain the optimal level of job performance in order to achieve their goals and missions. Improvement and sustainment of job performance can be achieved if an organization uses effective evaluation criteria to evaluate worker performance (Mecha 2013 36). An important aspect of designing a successful performance based reward program is the determination of the appropriate criteria to reward workers for their contributions to the organization. A supervisor or manager can look at three types of variables cost-related variables judgment on traits or attitudes and observation and recording of behaviour to evaluate the performance of individual workers (Louka 2011 24). Cost-related variables can be an excellent indicator of organizations effectiveness.It is however not sufficient enough to measure the performance of workers because cost-related variables do not inform the worker as to how or why he/she is effective or ineffective. Moreover these variables are not fully controllable by workers since many factors such as weather tools and equipment and economic conditions affect them (Lemmons 2014 36). Workers can be motivated and capable of doing the required work but they may not receive proper supervision. Lack of detailed planning design changes inadequate communication adverse weather congested work areas and non-availability of tools and materials at the right time at the right place are other factors that affect a workers performance over which he/she has little or no control (Griffin 2012 53). These factors significantly influence the cost quality quantity and timing of the project. Due to these uncontrollable factors productivity is reduced without being a result of the workers motivation and skills.Coblio (2011) argued that measurement of performance based on traditional performance variables such as cost quality quantity and time should be changed as these criteria are not sufficient for evaluating a workers performance. Psychologists also argue that the evaluation of a workers performance through observable behaviour is important to measure job performance or failure (Carafa 2011 35). Many researchers have become increasingly vocal about the need for broadly defining performance as the total contribution that a worker makes to an organization rather than using traditional measures. Organizational knowledge past contributions organizational citizenship behaviours and loyalty should be considered to define performance (Brown 2012 35). The parameters should incorporate knowledge skills and behavioural inputs that contribute to better performance (Askar 2010 34).Traditional job performance criteria are dependent on core technical proficiency. This trend has been changing recently: increasing effort has been given to incorporating motivational and interpersonal aspects of job performance (Pratheepkanth 2011 92). Behaviourally based measures are under the direct control of workers and are less affected by external factors than cost-related indexes. The advantage of behavioural criteria is that they allow the manager to determine how performance on cost-related variables can be maintained or improved (Mohammed & Eleswed 2013 44). These motivational or interpersonal performance variables are collectively called as contextual performance (Shrestha 2011 13). Numerous researchers have listed useful contextual performance variables and suggested that worker performance should be evaluated on both task and contextual performances (Nyaanga 2012 33).When workers see that supervisors do not evaluate performance with appropriate measures they may think that supervisors do not value the measures that are needed to succeed in the job. The consequences of differences in the perceptions of workers and supervisors due to the use of inappropriate measures in the reward criteria may decrease procedural fairness as well as the perception of distributive fairness (Mecha 2013 36). If employers want to optimally satisfy and motivate employees with a reward system managers need to understand the preferences of workers regarding the criteria used to determine the reward system. Satisfaction from a reward is increased when workers feel that it is based on appropriate criteria (Louka 2011 24). The workers perception of the determinants of the performance based reward is essential to his/her job satisfaction. Furthermore workers preferences on performance criteria give managers insight into what motivates workers to be more productive in order to maximize their performances and improve productivity.An understanding of workers preferences on reward criteria is a management imperative due to the dynamic nature of the construction industry and the constantly changing nature of workers attitudes and their preferences (Lemmons 2014 36). Some criteria that management views as valuable for performance evaluation may not be preferred by workers as the basis for their performance based reward. For instance management may think that evaluating their workers on the basis of leadership judgment planning and decision-making skills is appropriate; however workers may prefer some other performance criteria (Griffin 2012 53). A survey conducted by Coblio (2011) revealed that 50% of the respondents in consulting civil engineering firms perceived technical skills to be the main criteria; whereas one third of respondents companies considered communication skills project management administration goal setting and profit making as the important criteria for performance evaluation of employees in their civil engineering firm.According to Brown (2012) environmental factors within an organization that can impact the performance of the workforce include a training certification system a reward and recognition system a performance assessment system management support and control and organization culture. Similarly Brown (2012) put forward the concept that financial incentive programs can increase productivity by decreasing production costs and construction time. In many cases of worker performance evaluations important criteria of performance have been overlooked by management. For successful implementation of rewards based on performance both workers and management must agree on the criteria and priority rating that should be used for evaluation of their performance (Lemmons 2014 36).PerformanceIn studying any professional group it is important to be able to classify individuals according to their achievement (Griffin 2012 53). For one it is likely that the successful members of the profession set the standards of conduct which are followed by the less successful or aspiring professional. Also they are likely to display most clearly the attitudes that are characteristic of their profession. As early as 1932 a review of the literature by Brown (2012) found no significant relation between satisfaction and performance. Nevertheless research on the issue continued. Shrestha (2011) found that morale and job satisfaction were highly correlated to productivity in United States shipyards during World War II. Mecha (2013) found that job satisfaction correlated positively with high and low levels of productivity but was not related to the middle range of productivity.Askar (2010) and Griffin (2012) concluded that job satisfaction was related to certain aspects of productivity; yet Coblio (2011) claim the two variables are not necessarily related. In a major review Pratheepkanth (2011) concluded there is little evidence in the available literature that employee attitudes bear any simple or for that matter appreciablerelationship to performance on the job (p. 396). In spite of this negative conclusion Mohammed and Eleswed (2013) renewed interest in the issue when their review concluded that there is frequent evidence that positive job attitudes are favourable to increased productivity. The relationship is not absolute but there are enough data to justify attention to attitudes as a factor in improving the workers output (p. 103).Approaching the issue from a different perspective Brown (2012) argued that there existed small but positive relationships between these two controversial variables. Much of the research cited except Brown (2012) appears to be an outgrowth of the human relations movement which gained widespread attention during the 1930s. A major tenet of this approach suggested that higher morale leads to increased productivity and much of the research effort appears to have been directed at supporting this position. During the fifties a second major approach attempted to relate satisfaction and performance through moderators (Wong 2012 14). A variant considered satisfaction and performance as joint independent or dependent variables related to some third variable. A third major movement advocated that performance leads to satisfaction.Shrestha (2011) were instrumental in popularizing this approach. Their model simply stated says that good performance may lead to rewards which in turn lead to satisfaction; this formulation then would say that satisfaction rather than causing performance as was previously assumed is caused by it (p. 23). The rationale for their model is grounded in the expectancy theory (Nyaanga 2012 33). Brown (2012) attempt to eliminate some of the problems inherent in expectancy theory by incorporating aspects of equity theory and need theory to explain how satisfaction develops and how outcomes gain their valence and partially to explain how expectancies develop. This model considers performance a first level outcome (act in Brown (2012) terminology) rewards (each with their respective valence and relation to performance) as second level outcome and satisfaction a result of the usefulness of the rewards in satisfying needs.The basic point to be made is that satisfaction is seen as a dependent variable which should be related to valued outcome. Value of an outcome is determined by the degree to which it satisfies needs or by the degree of relationship perceived by the individual between outcomes and satisfaction. Satisfaction has only an indirect effect on performance via a feedback loop to expectancies. Public service entails meeting with communities and public organizations working on departmental or university committees and performing charitable or educational activities (Mohammed & Eleswed 2013 44). Some departments regard these activities highly and demand faculty successful in building contacts on the outside. However as in the case of teaching such activities are more inclined to receive local rather than national recognition.The market for faculty with these skills may be circumscribed given the difficulties inherent in determining a faculty members public service abilities. Administrative skills are largely learned on the job (Pratheepkanth 2011 92). While grant management departmental and university duties and prior work experiences provide faculty with some skills many administrative abilities reduce to experience in specific human capital (Askar 2010 34). Furthermore administrative skills are not easily measured and thus the market for this type of skill might be limited. But because administrators have a supervisory role in the department their salary is likely to be higher than that of other faculty.Most faculties enter the job market possessing more than one skill and the salary an individual is offered presumably includes a return for each skill valued by the employing department (Brown 2012 35). Different disciplines may assign different weights to given skills and hence the structure of salaries could vary by discipline. It might also vary by sex as males and females may be subject to dissimilar supply and demand phenomena.
EffectivenessPast salesperson evaluation research has focused primarily on the effectiveness dimension of performance (Askar 2010 34). From the salesperson point of view effectiveness has been defined as the extent to which preferred solutions are realized in the salesperson-customer interaction. Lemmons (2014) on the other hand defined effectiveness from the organizational standpoint as the degree to which salespersons make contributions to valued organizational outcomes such as profits market share or customer satisfaction. Insight into the determinants of salesperson effectiveness was provided by two key conceptual models by Askar (2010) as well as by a number of empirical studies in the sales literature that tested these models.Conceptually Askar (2010) model depicted salesperson effectiveness performance to be determined by salesperson motivation role perception and aptitude which in turn are influenced by individual organizational and environmental factors. Alternatively Askar (2010) provided a contingency approach to salesperson effectiveness. In this approach salesperson effectiveness is determined by a set of selling behaviours. The relationship between these selling behaviours and effectiveness are moderated by three sets of variables. The three sets of moderators are(1) the characteristics of the salesperson (e.g. knowledge of customer and product alternative choice and skills and capabilities);(2) the buyers task (buyers knowledge of the product product alternatives in the market and buyers experience with the product) and(3) the salesperson-customer relationship.The selling behaviours include the degree of adaptive selling (the altering of sales activities to fit customer needs and the sales context) influence bases (e.g. legitimacy or credibility) influence techniques (e.g. product-related or emotion-related) and salesperson-customer interaction. Askar (2010) model is supported by two meta-analysis studies. Brown (2012) explored six categories of antecedent variables: aptitude role perception motivation skills organizational and environmental factors. The findings of these studies suggest that no single category of variables predicts a sufficiently large amount of performance variance. The most predictive variables are salesperson role perceptions and skills which as will be discussed later can be enhanced by training. Most notably though the influence of the antecedent variables is moderated by the sales context: type of customers type of product sold and the particular performance measurements used.Overall Askar (2010) contingency model was supported. Shrestha (2011) completed another meta-analysis in which focus was placed on the influence of personal variables on performance. Two broad categories were evaluated: biographical and psychological variables. Again the results indicated that no single variable category predicted a large amount of performance variance. Although personal history and family background were found to be significantly associated with performance the influences were moderated by the type of customers the type of product sold and the particular performance measurements used.A key implication for sales managers stemming from this study is that no single personal variable can predict effectiveness sufficiently well. Given these findings recent personal selling research has examined other personal and organizational factors that may enhance salesperson effectiveness. Among these personal variables are the notions of working smart and working hard as well as salesperson goal orientations. Organizational variables that have been explored in this regard include sales force control systems organizational culture and sales force training. These variables are reviewed later in this chapter as focal constructs of the current study.
EfficiencyThe current business environments emphasis on cost-minimizing downsizing and maximizing productivity requires in addition to effectiveness a high level of efficiency from salespeople (Nyaanga 2012 33). In fact there are several reasons supporting the importance of efficiency in salesperson performance. First increased competition in domestic and foreign markets and the rapidly escalating costs of personal selling have heightened the need to not only sell effectively but to do so in an efficient manner as well. That is sales management is placing an increasing emphasis on sales force productivity (Mecha 2013 36). Thus many salespersons are increasingly being charged with the tasks of achieving sales objectives while minimizing the costs associated with those sales (Louka 2011 24). Secondly at the firm level Griffin (2012) found that the most popular measure of marketing performance is efficiency that is productivity.This finding was based on their survey of more than 50 studies spanning 30 years on the topic of assessing management performance. This firm-level emphasis on efficiency achievement may also directly or indirectly influence sales management to require salespeople to work more efficiently. Conceptually efficiency has been defined as the ratio of outputs of on activity to the inputs required by that activity (Shrestha 2011 13). Although marketing researchers have long been interested in measuring efficiency performance methods for measuring efficiency were much criticized. Recently however empirical studies have applied an advanced management science tool data envelopment analysis (DEA) to measure efficiency more accurately (Nyaanga 2012 33).
Satisfaction and ProductivityIn recent years there have been many writers who believe favourable employee attitudes and employee cantered supervision were necessary in order to spur greater productivity on the part of the employee (Mecha 2013 36). Brown (2012) for example has concluded that employees in high skilled Jobs will aspire for high quality work as well as an acceptable rate of productivity and will express a high interest in their Jobs whereas employees in low skill Jobs will aspire only to an acceptable rate of productivity and will show little interest in work. Brown (2012) has found that persons who are ego-involved in their Jobs are rated higher in Job performance than those who are not ego-involved in their Jobs.There is also some tendency for the relationship between ego-involvement and performance to be greater for persons who are high in autonomy. Pearson Barker and Elliott in their conclusions reached by means of scale analysis showed a significant correlation between efficiency of salesmen and Job satisfaction. Lemmons (2014) concluded that supervisors of high producing groups which were also the highest on member satisfactions possessed both the technological skills needed to support group tasks and the ability to help members to satisfy their important needs. The proposed relationship between satisfaction and productivity has not gone unchallenged however. Lemmons (2014) assume that individuals are motivated to achieve certain goals the achievement of which results in satisfaction.Productivity is seldom a goal in itself but is more commonly a means to goal attainment. High satisfaction and high production can be expected to occur together only when productivity is perceived as a means to attain certain important goals and when these goals are achieved. Under other conditions the relationship may be negative or may not exist at all. Askar (2010) found no relationship between any of the indexes of satisfaction and productivity. Brown (2012) concludes that the evidence from various studies is sufficiently powerful so that we should abandon in future research the use of satisfaction or morale indexes as variables intervening between supervisory and organizational characteristics on the one hand and productivity on the other (p. 48).Shrestha (2011) reports that his results fail to support the hypothesis that employee satisfaction is positively related to group productivity. In a study of the sales office situation Shrestha (2011) found that an individual salesmans satisfaction with his office manager was not correlated with his performance they concluded that in the present setting neither variable is the direct cause of the other. March and Simon see job satisfactions as influencing the decision to participate (to come to work) but not as affecting very directly the decisions to produce (to work hard). The early work of the Michigan Survey Research Centre was based on the notion that supervision influenced morale which influenced productivity but these researchers never succeeded in establishing any definite relation between morale and productivity. Graham concludes that productivity or job stability may be only a means toward the realization of certain other goals such as status or ownership of various luxuries. In addition when pressure for productivity is high an employee may perform efficiently even when he is quite dissatisfied this might help to explain the lack of a positive relationship between job satisfaction and increased production (Wong 2012 14).CHAPTER # 3: METHODOLOGY AND METHODS
Research DesignA more rigorous and systematic approach to studying the impact of reward system to employee productivity is through a quantitative research design which involves statistical treatments. In this type of empirical design numeric and quantifiable data is needed wherein after testing the hypothesis thorough various statistical treatments conclusions are formed logically and objectively. In particular the study will use a non-experimental quantitative study correlation study. The goal of a correlational study is to provide strong evidence that there is a relationship between the dependent variable (DV) and the independent variable (IV).In a survey research numeric description of attitudes trends and opinions of the sample population studied is provided.PopulationThe target population of this particular research study is comprised of employees of HR department from pharmaceutical industry.
Sampling and Sampling ProceduresThe sampling procedure of simple random sampling would be used for this particular research study. The sample is composed of 100 employees of HR department from pharmaceutical industry.Procedures for RecruitmentThe research participants were informed through email about the methodology of filling the survey. Information from the reviews was gathered through an online PC review system called SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey.com n.d.). The methodology will be started by reaching imminent participants by email or telephonically. Study participants will be advised on the obliged methods for getting authorization informed assent frame that needed participants signature. Every participant is asked for to sign and return the structures and reviews to the researcher. Participants are informed in the Letter of Introduction that they may decline to take an interest in the study or withdraw from the study whenever without penalty. The individual would have been informed that all records and materials gave to bolster his or her cooperation in the process would be secured
InstrumentationThe instrument for this particular research study will be developed by the researcher. Questionnaire for this study developed by observing the past research studies on the selected research topic.
Data AnalysisThe surveyed data set for this study particular research study were analyzed by using statistical software SPSS 20.0. Descriptive and inferential statistical techniques were used to analyze the surveyed data set. Proposed research hypothesis were examined by using one way ANOVA. Pearson correlation analysis was carried out to examine the strength of relationship among the study variables.Ethical ProceduresEthical concerns are principal when planning directing and assessing research. The strategies for the assurance of human participants were painstakingly noticed. An arbitrary numeric identifier was doled out to participants to guarantee the obscurity of their reactions all through the research process. The researcher would ensure the privacy and namelessness of the participants and guaranteed the outcomes are truthful. The researcher nonbiased precise and fair all through the procedure. The ethics starts with the idea of the research venture and finishes with how we speak to and offer with others what we have realized. In the middle of ethics ought to drive our hands on work direct our hypothesis decisions for elucidation and our cognizant consideration regarding self-reflexivity.As indicated by Creswell (2013) affectability security and extraordinary consideration ought to take in diverse regions i.e. educated assent from the research participants for taking an interest in the research; shielding the research participants from any conceivable damage; guaranteeing classifiedness and protection; and securing gatherings that is helpless. Consequently the researcher gained an educated assent marked by the research participants in consent to take an interest readily in the research. Moreover the researcher guarantees that no mischief is brought on to the research participant or some other individual connected with the study.The researcher likewise verifies that the names individual subtle elements and schools names are kept secret to look after protection. It was additionally be guaranteed by the researcher that the outcomes are kept in a sheltered spot to secure information burglary. Also the researcher comprehends the effect of individual predispositions on the outcomes and result of the study; subsequently the researcher tries to stay away from his own inclination to influence the elucidation of the outcomes. Ethical issues tended to amid every phase of the research. The researcher endeavours not to damage the security of people included and to make every vital step concerning ethical issues of the study. The accompanying measures are brought to guarantee congruity with ethical guidelines: research consent (an uncommon application structure) protection upkeep (obscurity) security of rights and affectability affirmation to social qualities racial and sexual orientation contrasts. The research authorization acquired by strict after the comparing college regulations. An announcement identifying with educated agree fastened to the overview and reflects consistence by support. It is prescribed the structure to be marked by every participant. Moreover every time the researcher starts directing a meeting he clarifies its motivation and how they got data utilized and also answers every single rising inquiry.The information gathered for this study late and pertinent to the research point. Studies that are important and add to the comprehension of the research theme and results utilized for adding to the hypothetical base for the research discoveries. Whats more data got from credible sources including libraries databases and online academic articles companion investigated researches and participants that give significant and precise data.
CHAPTER # 4: FINDINGS
IntroductionThis research study aimed at analyzing the relationship between the rewards systems of a pharmaceutical HR department and employees productivity performance and satisfaction. To accomplish this research aim this study focus on the employees productivity performance and satisfaction and reward management in pharmaceutical HR department. A questionnaire survey is conducted with the employees of pharmaceutical HR department. This chapter presents the survey findings and hypothesis testing.
Analysis of SurveyYour Age * Gender CrosstabulationCountQuestion 2: GenderTotalMaleFemaleAge21 302172831 404084841 501762351 and Older101Total7921100The above table indicated that most of the respondents who took part in this survey are from age group 31-40 and are male.The reward system has an impact on the employee performance and productivity.FrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidStrongly disagree11.01.01.0Disagree11.01.02.0Neutral2020.020.022.0Agree4545.045.067.0Strongly Agree3333.033.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of The reward system has an impact on the employee performance and productivity. There were 78 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that the reward system has an influential impact on the employee performance. So it can be said that reward system is effective for motivating the employees.My salary is satisfactory in relation to what I doFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidDisagree11.01.01.0Neutral1919.019.020.0Agree4545.045.065.0Strongly Agree3535.035.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of My salary is satisfactory in relation to what I do. There were 80 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that their salary is satisfactory in relation to what they do. So it can be said that most of the survey respondents are satisfied with their salary package.The basis of payment for example overtime payment is reasonableFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidStrongly disagree11.01.01.0Disagree22.02.03.0Neutral2727.027.030.0Agree4343.043.073.0Strongly Agree2727.027.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of The basis of payment for example overtime payment is reasonable. There were 70 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that the basis of payment for example overtime payment is reasonable. The survey respondents were satisfied with their incentives program.Salary increases are decided on a fair mannerFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidDisagree44.04.04.0Neutral1717.017.021.0Agree3636.036.057.0Strongly Agree4343.043.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of Salary increases are decided on a fair manner. There were 77 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that the increase in salary are decided on a fair manner. The reward system is implemented in todays world leading organizations in order to motivate their employees. On the other hand it can also be observed from the above table that there were only 4 percent of the survey respondents disagree with the asked statement.The payment policy in my company keeps me motivatedFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidStrongly disagree11.01.01.0Neutral1212.012.013.0Agree4747.047.060.0Strongly Agree4040.040.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of The payment policy in my company keeps me motivated. There were 87 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that the payment policy in their company keeps them motivated.The promotion policy in my company keeps me motivatedFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidDisagree77.07.07.0Neutral2121.021.028.0Agree3636.036.064.0Strongly Agree3636.036.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of The promotion policy in my company keeps me motivated. There were 72 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that the promotion policy in their company keeps them motivated. The promotion policy of any organization is effective for motivating their employees.I receive constructive criticism about my workFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidDisagree22.02.02.0Neutral1212.012.014.0Agree4242.042.056.0Strongly Agree4444.044.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of I receive constructive criticism about my work. There were 86 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that they receive constructive criticism about their work.The recognition policy in my company keeps me motivatedFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidNeutral2323.023.023.0Agree4141.041.064.0Strongly Agree3636.036.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of The recognition policy in my company keeps me motivated. There were 77 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that the recognition policy in their company keeps them motivated.I get the opportunity to mix with my colleagues and to communicate on aspects of our workFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidDisagree44.04.04.0Neutral2222.022.026.0Agree3232.032.058.0Strongly Agree4242.042.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of I get the opportunity to mix with my colleagues and to communicate on aspects of our work. There were 74 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that they get the opportunity to mix with their colleagues and to communicate on aspects of their work.Apart from all my financial and non financial benefits I enjoy my workFrequencyPercentValid PercentCumulative PercentValidNeutral1616.016.016.0Agree4848.048.064.0Strongly Agree3636.036.0100.0Total100100.0100.0The above table presents the findings of Apart from all my financial and non financial benefits I enjoy my work. There were 84 percent of the surveys respondents either agree or strongly agree that apart from all their financial and non financial benefits they enjoy their work and it ultimately increase productivity.
Hypothesis TestingH10: There isnt a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and performance.H1a: There is a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and performance.ANOVASum of SquaresdfMean SquareFSig.Between Groups6.67041.6681.843.013Within Groups40.71096.905Total47.380100From the above ANOVA table it can be observed that p value is 0.013 which is less than .05 so null hypotheses is rejected and concluded that is a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and performance.H20: There isnt a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and satisfaction.H2a: There is a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and satisfaction.ANOVASum of SquaresdfMean SquareFSig.Between Groups.8014.200.193.001Within Groups46.579961.035Total47.380100From the above ANOVA table it can be observed that p value is 0.001 which is less than .05 so null hypotheses is rejected and concluded that there is a significant impact of reward on pharmaceutical HR department employees productivity and satisfaction.
Correlation AnalysisCorrelationsIncentives and rewardsPerformanceProductivityIncentives and rewardsPearson Correlation1.726.782Sig. (2-tailed).000.004N100100100PerformancePearson Correlation.7261.816Sig. (2-tailed).000.001N100100100ProductivityPearson Correlation.782.8161Sig. (2-tailed).004.001N100100100The correlation among incentives and rewards and performance (r = 0.726 p = .000.Business Ownership Experience Entrepreneurial Behavior And Performance: Movice Habitual Serial And Portfolio Enterpreneurs. February 9 2015. etheses.nottingham.ac.uk. 17 November 2013 .Job Performance and Satisfaction. (2006 September 4). Retrieved March 22 2015 from ezinearticles: http://ezinearticles.com/?Job-Performance-and-Satisfaction&id=290072Frank S. A. (2010).What does it take to motivate better performance and productivity in the federal workplace? ask the employees(Order No. 3468037). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (885766770). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/885766770?accountid=35812Griffin J. D. (2012).Leadership recognition of organizational citizenship behaviors in performance evaluations in washington state healthcare organizations(Order No. 3534889). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ University of Phoenix; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1282652882). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1282652882?accountid=35812Jenks J. (1991). Do your performance appraisals boost productivity? Management Revie 45-47.Ju M. (2010).The impact of institutional and peer support on faculty research productivity: A comparative analysis of research vs. non-research institutions(Order No. 3428719). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (759116154). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/759116154?accountid=35812Lemmons T. M. (2014).A phenomenological study of the lived experience of work productivity among non-tenure track agriculture-based extension faculty at a research-intensive land-grant university(Order No. 3667011). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1642488493). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1642488493?accountid=35812Liu Y. (2010).Exploring multiple patterns of faculty productivity in STEM disciplines at doctoral universities(Order No. 3575908). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1460754216). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1460754216?accountid=35812Louka A. (2011).The role of perceived relatedness in intrinsic need satisfaction: A gender differences study in the workplace(Order No. 3495872). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (924472803). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/924472803?accountid=35812Madden S. (2014).Examining employees perceptions of corporate volunteerism in a small organization as it affects employee satisfaction and performance: A qualitative study(Order No. 3643643). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1627153663). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1627153663?accountid=35812Mecha E. I. (2013).An examination of employee perception about the relationship between communication satisfaction and productivity in the nigerian banking industry(Order No. 3605535). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1490797090). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1490797090?accountid=35812Mohammed F. & Eleswed M. (2013). Job Satifaction and Organizational Commitment: A Correlational Study in Bahrain. International Journal of Business Humanities and Technology 43-44.Nayavich J. (2013).Exploring compensation model reform towards improved innovation and productivity within three manufacturing firms(Order No. 3571492). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1431144393). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1431144393?accountid=35812Nyaanga S. G. (2012).The impact of telecommuting intensity on employee perception outcomes: Job satisfaction productivity and organizational commitment(Order No. 3557296). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1335198889). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1335198889?accountid=35812Okwendi S. J. (2013).Relationship between leadership and officers job satisfaction: Impact on public safety in nigeria(Order No. 3601476). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1466301254). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1466301254?accountid=35812Pratheepkanth P (2011). Reward System and Its Impact on Employee Motivation in Commercial Bank of Sri Lanka Plc In Jaffna District. Global Journal of Management and Business Research: 85-92.Shrestha T. (2011).Industry perceptions on reward issues of construction workers to improve productivity(Order No. MR81382). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (913006470). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/913006470?accountid=35812Victorino C. A. (2012).Examining faculty satisfaction productivity and collegiality in higher education: Contemporary contexts and modern methods(Order No. 3540219). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1099072170). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1099072170?accountid=35812Wong M. (2012).Telework and human resources goals: Examining the relationship between telecommuting employee engagement job satisfaction and productivity(Order No. 1549050). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1475264198). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1475264198?accountid=35812Yapa S (2002). An examination of the relationship among job satisfaction rewards and organizational commitment. Journal of the Management Science: 46-66.

 

"You need a similar assignment done from scratch? Our qualified writers will help you with a guaranteed AI-free & plagiarism-free A+ quality paper, Confidentiality, Timely delivery & Livechat/phone Support.

Discount Code: CIPD30

WHATSAPP CHAT: +1 (781) 253-4162

Click ORDER NOW..