Given that financial rewards constitute more than 40 percent of payroll budgets, total reward is a most important and complex notion that organizations seeking to accomplish set purpose(s) must pursue. Vying to sustain themselves and to gain competitive advantage, business enterprises and other societal organizations increasingly care for their employees’ well-being. Ergo, employers face two decision options, namely financial and non-financial rewards that make employees content. Unfortunately, most firms emphasize one option more than the other, depending on their prevailing circumstances. Using a mutual-investment framework as a guide, this article explores the influence of employees’ total rewards on corporate performance.
Analyzed are the influences of both financial and non-financial employee rewards on an educational institution performance and how such rewards improve performance. When provided, total rewards can entreat employees to retain their positions, while remaining loyal to their respective organizations. Yet the implementation of total rewards in an educational institution calls for employees’ bravery, especially concerning non-financial rewards, which render employees semi-autonomous.
ArthurJB. Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover. Academy of Management Journal. 1994;37:670–87.
2.
AudenaertM, VanderstraetenA, BuyensD. Mutual investment employee-organization relationship: A conceptual model of how and when it is functional, in 12th European Academy of Management conference (EURAM 2012): Social innovation for competitiveness, organisational performance and human excellence2012.
3.
BarberAE, DunhamRB, FormisanoRA. The impact of flexible benefits on employee satisfaction: A field study. Personnel Psychology. 1992;45:55–74.
4.
BeckerB, GerhartB. The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: Progress and prospects. Academy of Management Journal. 1996;39:779–801.
5.
BermanEM, BowmanJS, WestJP, Van WartMR. Human resource management in public service: Paradoxes, processes, and problems: Sage, 2012.
6.
BoselieP, DietzG, BoonC. Commonalities and contradictions in HRM and performance research. Human Resource Management Journal. 2005;15:67–94.
7.
BowenDE, OstroffC. Understanding HRM–firm performance linkages: The role of the “strength” of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review. 2004;29:203–21.
8.
BroussardSC, GarrisonM. The relationship between classroom motivation and academic achievement in elementary-school-aged children. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal. 2004;33:106–20.
9.
DansoD, UmehDN, Yaw SokpahE, NkrumahS, Wereko BrobbeyT. Effects Of Rewards Systems On Employees Performance, 2013.
10.
DasP. Pay of R&D personnel in manufacturing organizations: The role of organisational reward system. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 1996:482–500.
11.
DeCenzoD, RobbinsS. Human Resource Management. New Tork: John Wiley & Son Inc. 1996, 237–52.
12.
DeciEL, KoestnerR, RyanRM. A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation, ed: American Psychological Association, 1999.
13.
DeleryJE, DotyDH. Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal. 1996;39:802–35.
14.
DiamandisPH, KotlerS. Bold: How to go big, create wealth and impact the world: Simon and Schuster. 2015.
15.
DreherGF, AshRA, BretzRD. Benefit coverage and employee cost: Critical factors in explaining compensation satisfaction. Personnel Psychology. 1988;41:237–54.
16.
GeorgantzasNC. Firefighting societal human-system ignorance at B-schools. Human Systems Management. 2016;35:141–59.
17.
GeorgantzasNC, KatsamakasEG. M&A and corporate-governance dynamics. Human Systems Management. 2017;36:221–8.
18.
GuayF, ChanalJ, RatelleCF, MarshHW, LaroseS, BoivinM. Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2010;80:711–35.
19.
GuestDE, MichieJ, ConwayN, SheehanM. Human resource management and corporate performance in the UK. British Journal of Industrial Relations. 2003;41:291–314.
20.
HaganB. Improving employee perception of benefits by focusing on” customers”. Benefits Quarterly. 1997;13:19.
21.
Heneman IIIHG, SchwabDP. Pay satisfaction: Its multidimensional nature and measurement. International Journal of Psychology. 1985;20:129–41.
22.
JiaL, ShawJ, ParkT. A social-structural analysis of employeeorganization relationships and team creativity. Academy of Management Journal, Revise and Resubmit. 2012.
23.
LaiW-H. Willingness-to-engage in technology transfer in industry–university collaborations. Journal of Business Research. 2011;64:1218–23.
24.
LambooijM, SandersK, KosterF, ZwiersM. Human Resource Practices and Organisational Performance: Can the HRM-performance linkage be explained by the cooperative behaviours of employees?Management Revue. 2006:223–40.
25.
LuthansF, StajkovicAD. Reinforce for performance: The need to go beyond pay and even rewards. The Academy of Management Executive. 1999;13:49–57.
26.
ManvilleB, OberJ. Beyond empowerment: Building a company of citizens. Harvard Business Review. 2003;81:48–53.
27.
MiceliMP, LaneMC. Antecedents of pay satisfaction: A review and extension: College of Business, Ohio State University, 1990.
28.
MudaI, RafikiA, HarahapMR. Factors influencing employees’ performance: A study on the islamic banks in indonesia. International Journal of Business and Social Science. 2014;5.
29.
MurphyB. The impact of reward systems on employee performance, Dublin Business School, 2015.
30.
RumpelS, MedcofJW. Total rewards: Good fit for tech workers. Research-Technology Management. 2006;49:27–35.
31.
SaeedR, MussawarS, LodhiRN, IqbalA, NayabHH, YaseenS. Factors affecting the performance of employees at work place in the banking sector of pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. 2013;17:1200–08.
32.
ShawJD, DineenBR, FangR, VellellaRF. Employee-organization exchange relationships, HRM practices, and quit rates of good and poor performers. Academy of Management Journal. 2009;52:1016–33.
33.
SinclairRR, HanniganMA, TetrickLE. Benefit coverage and employee attitudes: A social exchange perspective, 1995.
34.
SinclairRR, LeoMC, WrightC. Benefit system effects on employees’ benefit knowledge, use, and organizational commitment. Journal of Business and Psychology. 2005;20:3–29.
35.
SzilagyiAD. Management and performance: Santa Monica, Calif.: Goodyear Publishing Company, 1981.
36.
ThomasK. The four intrinsic rewards that drive employee engagement. Ivey Business Journal. 2009;73:1–12.
37.
ThomasKW. Intrinsic motivation at work: What really drives employee engagement: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2009.
38.
TinofireiC. The unique factors affecting employee performance in non-profit organisations, 2011.
39.
TsuiA, WangD. Employment relationships from the employer’s perspective: Current research and future directions. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 2002;17:77–114.
40.
TsuiAS, PearceJL, PorterLW, TripoliAM. Alternative approaches to the employee-organization relationship: Does investment in employees pay off?Academy of Management Journal. 1997;40:1089–121.
41.
WardEA, DavisE. The effect of benefit satisfaction on organizational commitment. Compensation and Benefits Management. 1995;11:35–35.
42.
ZhangAY, TsuiAS, SongLJ, LiC, JiaL. How do I trust thee? The employee-organization relationship, supervisory support, and middle manager trust in the organization. Human Resource Management. 2008;47:111–32.
