non monetary rewards

17
Article Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices Pragya Sonawane This paper reports the results of an exploratory study of non-monetary rewards in terms of the employee choices and organizational practices. The study describes the phenomenon and discusses the perspectives of employees as well as the employers and compares the approaches of Indian and foreign multinationals in the FMCG sector. Seven pointers to the designing of recognition programmes are made along with identifying the future research possibilities. Pragya Sonawane is from Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai 400088 E-Mail:[email protected] Scope of Non-monetary Rewards A study on work rewards touches the life of every individual associated either directly or indirectly with work. Since rewards get extended beyond the workplace their impact on families is certain. The use of recognition as a means of influencing behaviour is not a novel idea. As one of the basic needs of human beings, recognition has found ample place in literature. Every single motivational theory has discussed its relevance and impacts on individual behaviour. The increased emphasis in recent times, however, owed to the changes in work life due to environ- mental pressures, both internal and external. The challenge of retaining the talent has led organizations into experi- menting with fresh ways of rewarding. With increased salaries becoming entitlement for employees, the extensive scope of non-monetary rewards presents varied options for use. Human Relations School Human beings have constantly endeavoured to stretch beyond potential. Issues related to improving efficiency 256 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

Transcript of non monetary rewards

Page 1: non monetary rewards

Article

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices &Organizational Practices

Pragya Sonawane

This paper reports the results of anexploratory study of non-monetaryrewards in terms of the employeechoices and organizationalpractices. The study describes thephenomenon and discusses theperspectives of employees as wellas the employers and compares theapproaches of Indian and foreignmultinationals in the FMCG sector.Seven pointers to the designing ofrecognition programmes are madealong with identifying the futureresearch possibilities.

Pragya Sonawane is from Tata Institute of SocialSciences, Mumbai 400088E-Mail:[email protected]

Scope of Non-monetary Rewards

A study on work rewards touches thelife of every individual associated eitherdirectly or indirectly with work. Sincerewards get extended beyond theworkplace their impact on families iscertain. The use of recognition as ameans of influencing behaviour is not anovel idea. As one of the basic needs ofhuman beings, recognition has foundample place in literature. Every singlemotivational theory has discussed itsrelevance and impacts on individualbehaviour. The increased emphasis inrecent times, however, owed to thechanges in work life due to environ-mental pressures, both internal andexternal. The challenge of retaining thetalent has led organizations into experi-menting with fresh ways of rewarding.With increased salaries becomingentitlement for employees, the extensivescope of non-monetary rewards presentsvaried options for use.

Human Relations School

Human beings have constantlyendeavoured to stretch beyond potential.Issues related to improving efficiency

256 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

Page 2: non monetary rewards

have always intrigued the human mindand whether it is Adam Smith�s Divisionof Labour or Taylor�s Scientific Manage-ment, theories have been conceivedtowards improving efficiency. The useof non-monetary factors, however, couldbe traced to the post Human RelationsSchool of management thought. Theserendipitous results of the Hawthorneexperiments indicated the presence offactors other than monetary andphysiological variables and their impactson employee productivity. Thesefindings opened a new chapter andrevolutionized the field of managementresearch.

Lindhal (1949) conducted a series ofresearches where employees consistentlyranked items such as �full appreciationfor work done�, �feeling in on things�,and �interesting work� as being moreimportant to them than the traditionalincentives (cited in Nelson 2001). Otherresearchers like Kovach (1980) andWilson (1988) later replicated thesefindings. In their survey of sixteenstudies including over eleven thousandemployees, Herzberg et al. (1957:46)concluded that the average worker rankspay sixth in importance behind security,interesting work, opportunity foradvancement, appreciation, companyand management, and intrinsic aspectsof the job. Keller�s (1965) study toidentify the job factors important toemployees found eight factors none ofwhich related closely to monetaryrewards. The eight factors were jobsatisfaction, pride in organisation,relation with fellow workers, relationswith superiors, treatment by manage-

ment, opportunity to use ideas,opportunity to offer suggestions at workand appreciation of one�s efforts. Inanother study by W.W. Ronan (1970) itwas found that the job characteristicsthat were important to a diverse groupof employees were related to the natureof work they do and satisfaction that theyobtain from it.

Job is meaningful for employees ifit involves them in the identificationand solution of the problems thataffect them.

Meaningful Work

According to researches conductedin the field of �meaningful work�, a jobis meaningful for employees if itinvolves them in the identification andsolution of the problems that affect them.It is said that if the worker could voicehis/her opinion, it would bring positiveresults for both the worker and theorganisation. (Roche & Mackinnon1970)

A study on job preferences of overfifty-seven thousand job applicants,conducted over a period of thirty years,indicated security, advancementopportunity and type of work, as the jobfactors most important to men. Womenemployees considered type of work,company and security as the mostimportant job factors in decidingwhether their job is good or bad. Bothmen and women ranked pay lower toadvancement opportunity and type ofwork (Jurgensen 1978).

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 257

Page 3: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

258 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

Kovach (1980) reports of studies thatcompared manager�s ranking of whatthey wanted from their jobs with whattheir bosses thought were important tothe managers. At the top of the managers�list was interesting work, followed byappreciation of work, a feeling of being�in on things�, job security and goodwages. The employers however thoughtgood wages, job security, promotion/growth, good working conditions andinteresting work as most important totheir employees (cited in Bessell et al.2002). A study of 1385 workersrepresenting five occupational groupsindicated that intrinsic rewards were themost powerful determinants of worksatisfaction, followed by extrinsic socialrewards and extrinsic organizationalrewards. Extrinsic organizationalrewards were important only to workersin lower level occupations. The findingsof the study suggested that all classes ofworkers were demanding more fromtheir work than the traditional rewardsof good pay, safe and comfortableconditions and opportunities for gettingahead. Autonomy, meaning andchallenge in work were sought more thanthe traditional rewards (Mottaz 1980).

In another study of 51 organisationsin India, Sharma (1989:167) definedOrganisational Climate as a set of ninefactors viz. Scope for Advancement,

Grievance Handling, Monetary Benefits,Participative Management, Objectivityand Rationality, Recognition andAppreciation, Safety and Security,Training and Education, and WelfareFacilities. It was found that employersbelieved Safety and Security, andMonetary Benefits as the most importantneeds. In his book Not by Bread Alone,Sharma (1989:129) insisted that therewas the need by Indian public sectororganisations to focus on employeeAdvancement Opportunities, Trainingand Education and ParticipativeManagement to improve on theirorganisational climate scores. Thesewere imperative for improving theemployer-employee relations.

Studies quoted above were conductedover a period of five decades (1940-1990)and attended largely to a general enquiryinto job factors important to employees.However with changing times and everchanging needs of employees, morefocused enquiry in the field of non-monetary rewards was initiated in the lastone and a half decades (1990-2005).Graham (1990) conducted a study illus-trating the significance of non-monetaryrewards. After examining and askingemployees about 65 potential incentivesin the workplace, the top five incentivesas initiated by managers and based onemployee performance were found to benon-monetary in nature (cited in Nelson2001).

Positive Reinforcements

Fred Luthans has been instrumentalin establishing positive reinforcement

At the top of the managers� list wasinteresting work, followed byappreciation of work, a feeling ofbeing �in on things�, job securityand good wages.

Page 4: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 259

effects of recognition on performance.A meta-analysis of all the studiesconducted over a period of 20 years,found an average of 15 percentperformance improvement in serviceapplications. When recognition wascombined with performance feedback anaverage increase of 41 percent wasreported in manufacturing and 30percent in service organizations(Luthans & Stajkovic 1999, Stajkovic &Luthans 1997). The use of monetaryincentives however also had the sameimpact as recognition in serviceorganisations, although recognitioncombined with performance feedback,had a double (30% vs. 14%) impact incomparison to monetary incentives inservice organisations (Luthans &Stajkovic 2000:3). The findings of the1993 study of changing US workforcealso indicated a rise in the importanceof non-monetary rewards. Whenemployees were asked the reasons thatwere �very important� in deciding to takea job with the current employer, the topvariable listed by 65% of respondents was�open communication�, followed by�effect on personal/family life�, �natureof work� and �management quality�.Wages ranked 16th on the list (cited inNelson 2001:8). According to anothersurvey of executives by Robert HalfInternational (1994) more than 34percent of executives reported that lackof praise and recognition was the number

one reason why people left their jobs(cited in Nelson 2001:8). Barkema(1995) conducted an econometric studyin 1985 on 116 managers in mid sizedfirms and tried to assess the role ofexternal intervention on work per-formance. The findings indicated that inthe case of impersonal supervision, therewas a positive influence of monitoring.While in cases where there was strictregulation there was a negative influenceon work performance. Extrinsicinterventions made the employees feelthat the managers did not have faith intheir abilities (cited in Frey & Jegen2000:13-14).

Motivating Language

According to Mayfield et al. (1998),supervisor�s use of motivating languagecorrelates significantly with sub-ordinate�s performance and job satis-faction. A survey conducted on nursingstaff proved the hypothesis that thesuperior�s use of motivating languagehad a positive effect on the subordinate�sperformance and job satisfaction(Mayfield et al. 1998). Role of linemanagers is also considered importantin motivating employees by reinforcingbehaviour through the non-financialrewards like praise and feedback (Fisher1996). It has been confirmed byNewcomb (1999) and Ballentine et al.

Supervisor�s use of motivatinglanguage correlates significantlywith subordinate�s performanceand job satisfaction.

The three most prevalent non-monetary rewards identified wereAdvancement Opportunities, Opp-ortunities Flexible Work Schedulesand Opportunities to Learn New Skills

Page 5: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

260 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

(2003) that non- monetary rewards playan important role in controlling staffturnover. Banker et al (2000) confirmthat firms are increasingly adopting non-financial incentives. Mushrush (2002)identifies lack of non-monetary rewardsas an important cause for employeeturnover. (cited in Essayarchive.com).Strategic Rewards Survey done byWatson Wyatt of about 410 employersin 2000 found that employers were usingnon-monetary rewards more than whatthey used a year ago (Watson Wyatt,2006). The three most prevalent non-monetary rewards identified wereAdvancement Opportunities (76%, upfrom 60% in 1999), Flexible WorkSchedules (73%, up from 64%) andOpportunities to Learn New Skills (68%,up from 62%). Nelson (2001) exploredthe conditions that enabled or inhibitedthe use of non-monetary rewards bymanagers. His findings suggested thatmanagers who were high users of non-monetary rewards, had an initial positiveexperience with the behaviour, whichhad made them more likely to use non-monetary rewards with their employeesthemselves and other colleagues. Sheryland Don Grimme from the EmployeeRetention Headquarters (US) haveworked on projects which emphasize theimportance of non-monetary rewards(Sheryl and Don Grimme 2001).

Studies conducted in India in thefield of organizational commitmentshow non-tangible extrinsic rewards tobe critical in determining organizationalcommitment. A study in a manu-facturing organisation in the privatesector reported job content and per-

formance appraisal as the two criticaldeterminants of organisational commit-ment (Sharma & Joshi 2001). This wasdespite the fact that the respondents hadasserted �money� and �welfare� as themost neglected dimensions of humanresource management in the organi-sation.

The use of rewards to motivateperformance has also been studied. In ameta-analytic review of researches (45researches conducted over a period of 40years), it was claimed that the averageeffect of incentives on all tasks in all worksettings was a 22% gain in performance.The study reported that monetary rewardstend to influence performance more thannon-monetary rewards. The performancegains for money were (27%) twice theaverage gains from non-monetaryrewards (13%). However, it was assertedthat the findings should be �viewed withcaution�, since the number of monetaryrewards studies were four times the otherstudies. Moreover, the actual cash valueof the non-tangible gifts was notascertained (Condly et al. 2003:46-63).

Major Benefits

Jeffrey (2003) cites three majorbenefits of non-monetary rewards;Separability, Memory Value and TrophyValue. A study conducted in a publicsector organisation in Turkey suggestedthat employees valued non-monetaryrewards as much as monetary rewards.The employees claimed that the usage ofnon-monetary rewards was inadequate intheir organisation and that they lookforward to such initiatives. It was claimed

Page 6: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 261

that employees prefer job related non-monetary rewards more than social or anyother tangible non-monetary incentive(Yavuz 2004). A theoretical attempt toestablish the significance of non-monetary rewards was made by Crifo andDiaye (2004) who developed a principal-agent model using both monetary andnon-monetary incentives and showed hownon-monetary incentives could competewith monetary incentives and couldperform better in increasing the intrinsicmotivation of the agent. An online pollby Martiz Research Inc (2005), conductedin United States of America over 1,002randomly selected, full-time, employedadults (502 male, 500 female) aged 18 �65+ identified significant gaps betweenhow employees are recognised and howthey want to be recognised. The study alsoindicated that the employees who weresatisfied with their organisation�srecognition programs were also moresatisfied with their jobs and were morelikely to remain with their company thanthose who were not satisfied with theirorganisation�s recognition programs.Research revealed that satisfiedemployees were more likely to invest intheir own company and felt more valuedas employees. Moreover, 55% of emp-loyees were found to agree or stronglyagree that the quality of organisation�srecognition efforts significantlyinfluences their job performance.Chronology of researches on non-monetary rewards is listed in Table 1.

Conceptual Framework

The framework as depicted throughthe conceptual map (Fig 1) presents the

research suppositions and lines ofenquiry from the organization�s andemployee�s perspectives. It is assumedthat an organization�s profile will havean influence on its philosophy which inturn will monitor the practices. Likewisean individual�s characteristics willdetermine his/her needs which will bemanifested through the choices that theymake. Role of the superior is assumedto have an impact on how the rewardsare practiced within the organization.The past experiences of the individualemployee with non-monetary rewardsare said to impact their needs and thesame is expected of the organization andsuperior. Finally, some differences areexpected between employee choices andorganizational practices which whenresolved may lead to positive outcomesfor the organization as well as theemployees.

Methodology

This research work endeavoured todevelop a holistic comprehension of thephenomenon of non-monetary rewardsby exploring the related issues. Twodifferent organisations (one Indian andanother foreign) were studied. Thedifferent factors influencing rewardphilosophy and practices were ques-tioned. Employee perceptions andchoices were studied with a focus on thefactors influencing them. Moreover,

Research revealed that satisfiedemployees were more likely toinvest in their own company andfelt more valued as employees.

Page 7: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

262 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

Table 1: Chronology of Researches on Non-monetary Rewards

Researcher Period STUDY

Lawrence Lindhal 1949 Ranking of job factors

Frederick Herzberg et al. 1957 Survey of sixteen studies on job factors

Ellis O. Keller 1965 Importance of job factors

W.W. Ronan 1970 Job characteristics

William J. Roche &Neil L. Mackinnon 1970 Meaningful work

Clifford E Jurgensen 1978 Job preferences

Kenneth Kovach 1980 Ranking of job factors

Clifford J Mottaz 1980 Importance of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards

Baldev Raj Sharma 1987 Organisational climate

Merchant 1989 Honorary recognition

Gerald Graham 1990 Incentives at workplace

Study of Changing Workforce 1993 Reasons for taking a job with a particular employer

Robert Half International 1994 Reasons for leaving the job

Barkema 1995 Influence of supervision

Jacqueline Rowley Mayfield,Milton Ray Mayfield &Jerry Kopf 1998 Supervisor�s use of motivating language & its effect on

performance

Newcomb 1999 Staff turnover

Fred Luthans &Alexander D. Stajkovic 2000 Effect of recognition on performance meta-analysis of

studies conducted over a period of 20 yrs.

Watson Wyatt 2000 Strategic rewards survey

Bob Nelson 2001 Characteristics of managers who are high users of non-monetary rewards.

Sheryl & Don Grimme 2001 Importance of non-monetary rewards

Baldev Raj Sharma &Rama J Joshi 2001 Determinants of organisational commitment

Steven J Condly, RichardeClark & Harold D Stolovitch 2003 Effects of incentives on performance

Scott Jeffrey 2003 Non-tangible rewards

Nilay Yauz 2004 Non-monetary rewards in a public organisation in Turkey

Patricia Crifo & Marc-ArthurDiaye 2004 Theoretical model comparing monetary & non-monetary

incentives

Martiz Research Inc 2005 Online poll comparing reward practices to employeepreferences

Page 8: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 263

(PSKDVLV�RQ�QRQ�

PRQHWDU\�UHZDUGV

(PSKDVLV�RQ�WHDP�

UHZDUGV

3/3

3URILOH

6WUDWHJ\

&XOWXUH

3DVW

H[SHULHQFHV

%HOLHI�LQ�1RQ�

PRQHWDU\�UHZDUGV�

/HDGHUVKLS�VW\OH�

3URYLGHV�RSHQ�

FRPPXQLFDWLRQ

3DVW

H[SHULHQFHV

2SHQ�&RPQ��

)HHGEDFN�3DW�

RQ�WKH�EDFN

+ROLGD\�7ULSV�*LIW�

9RXFKHUV�

(PSOR\HH�RI�

WKH�PRQWK

%HWWHU�HPSOR\HH�

PRWLYDWLRQ

,QFUHDVHG�

2UJDQL]DWLRQDO�

FRPPLWPHQW

%HWWHU�SHUIRUPDQFH

',)

)(5(1&(6

'D\�RII

6DEEDWLFDOV

$SSUHFLDWLRQ

6HQVLWLYLW\

)HHGEDFN

1HHGV�7LPH�RII"

6HOI�HVWHHP

6HOI�DFWXDOL]DWLRQ

6RFLDO

$JH

*HQGHU

0DULWDO�6WDWXV

&DUHHU�6WDJH

)XQFWLRQDO

&KDUDFWHULVWLFV

3DVW

H[SHULHQFHV

,PPHGLDWH�6XSHULRU

,QIRUPDO�1RQ�

PRQHWDU\

)RUPDO�1RQ�PRQHWDU\

5HZDUGV�3UDFWLFHG

2XWFRPH�RI�UHVROYLQJ

WKH�GLIIHUHQFHV

5HZDUG�3KLORVRSK\

2UJDQLVDWLRQ

(PSOR\HH

(PSOR\HH�1HHGV

,QIRUPDO�1RQ�

PRQHWDU\

,QIRUPDO�1RQ�PRQHWDU\

5HZDUG�&KRLFHV

)LJXUH��

Page 9: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

264 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

differences between organisationpractices and employee choices wereanalysed to identify the intricacies ofemployee motivation. Finally, theresearch aimed at presenting an intra andinter-organisation perspective of non-monetary rewards.

Objectives of the study

1) To explore the meaning of non-monetary rewards and identifyfactors that influence rewardphilosophy and practices.

2) To identify the factors that shapes anindividual�s perception and choicestowards a particular reward.

3) To explore differences between thechoices of the individuals and thepractices of the organization.

4) To explore how can the gapsbetween the employee choices andorganisation practices be judi-ciously reduced.

The study was placed in qualitativeparadigm with the ontologicalassumption of reality being subjective innature. Epistemology of the studyentailed studying individual perceptionsof the employees and the organization.Two organizations were identified withthe inclusion criteria of having anexisting system of non-monetaryrewards (minimum five years ofoperation). Theoretical sampling wasadopted to select the employees withinthe organization. Inductive logic ofenquiry was used to arrive at a set ofconcepts as regards non-monetary

rewards and data was collected throughin-depth interviews with the help of aninterview guide. Data analysis aimed atto build concepts and themes from thedata collected through interviews.The objective was to describe thephenomenon, classify and interconnectthe concepts to arrive at �thick des-cription� of the issues under consi-deration.

Findings

The foremost learning that wascritical to this study and to various otherfuture endeavours was the operation-alisation of non-monetary rewards asthey function in the corporate. Non-monetary rewards as recognized by theorganisational representatives can bedefined as �the formal reward platformswhereby a token is given to employeesfor recognising their efforts or/andachievements.� The emphasis was on theformal nature of the programs, (said tohave a better impact than informalinitiatives), the token which may bemonetary or not, and recognition, whichwas the underlying premise for thesuccess of any reward program. Praiseand appreciation were viewed asinformal recognition opportunitieswhereby managers could build employeemotivation and sustain performance.However, it was asserted that since thesewere not institutionalised into thesystem, their impacts and subsequentlythe perceived value were low. Thesewere also under the discretion of theindividual manager, whose character-istics influenced the usage of suchrewards. Employee�s perception of such

Page 10: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 265

rewards remained unclear as everypositive aspect of work was referred asa non-monetary reward. From apromotion to a praise, from a paidvacation to a training program, all wereperceived to be non-monetary rewards.No strict definition of non-monetaryrewards was possible from theemployee�s standpoint since theserewards were perceived to have anindefinite scope.

The role of the managers at highechelons of an organisation issignificant in influencing thereward philosophy of theorganisation.

Top management�s views and thevalues of the organisation were found asthe two key determinants of anorganisation�s reward philosophy. It wasfound that belief of top management inthe power of recognition was crucial inensuring that organisation practiced suchnon-monetary rewards. Moreover, whenan organisation espoused peopleoriented values, it would have a betterfocus on rewarding and hence wouldinitiate a more robust reward system.Thus, the role of the managers at highechelons of an organisation is significantin influencing the reward philosophy ofthe organisation.

While designing the non-monetaryreward practices, employers took note ofthe work role of employees. For a salesfunction, a set of rewards were usedwhich was different from what were usedin a corporate role. This was done due

to the different job profiles of theemployees.

Sharing good relations with thesuperior tends to increase theperceived value of recognition/reward provided by the superior.

Another important factor indetermining the reward practices was therole of the immediate superior. Anindividual who finds appreciation andrecognition as important for employeemotivation would use the non-monetaryreward platforms to recognize his/hersubordinates. Moreover, it was foundthat the relationship that an employeeshares with his/her manager was criticalfor the employee to perceive the rewardas valuable. Sharing good relations withthe superior tends to increase theperceived value of recognition/rewardprovided by the superior. This was truefor praise and appreciation also;employees did not perceive recognitionas sincere when given by an estrangedsenior. Thus, the role of the superiorinfluences the way non-monetaryrewards are practiced and perceived inan organisation.

It was observed in the two cases(Indian and Foreign multinational) thatemployee characteristics (Age, Sex,Functional Role, Marital Status, Yearsof Experience), did not influence theirneeds. Career Advancement Opportu-nities emerged as the most prominentneed in majority of the cases. A verylimited influence of employee character-istic on employee reward needs was

Page 11: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

266 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

established when married womendemanded better timing at work andother facilities for managing home fromthe office. As regards employeeperception and choices, inter-linkageswere found between organisation�sreward philosophy and employeechoices. It was observed from the twocases that when an organisation�s rewardphilosophy supported an extensiveconfiguration of non-monetary rewardsand when the organisation believed inrecognising and celebrating achieve-

The organisation�s rewardingphilosophy influences the emp-loyee�s perception and choicestowards the non-monetary rewards.

ments, the employees also tend to valuethe rewards more. However, when thereward philosophy did not advocaterecognition and celebration and whenthe organisation put low emphasis onnon-monetary rewards, employees alsosubsequently take the rewardsfrivolously. Thus, the organisation�srewarding philosophy influences theemployee�s perception and choicestowards the non-monetary rewards.Fig 2 summarises the findings of thestudy.

Diverging & Converging Issues

There were no prominentdifferences between employee choicesand organisational practices. However,

7RS

0DQDJHPHQWV

EHOLHI

2UJDQLVDWLRQD

9DOXHV

:RUN�3URILOH

5HZDUG

3KLORVRSK\�

([WHQVLYH

105

&RQILJXUDWLRQ

105

3UDFWLFHV

7RS

0DQDJHPHQWV

EHOLHI

7RS

0DQDJHPHQWV

EHOLHI

Fig. 2Factors Influencing Non-monetary Rewards Philosophy & Practices

Page 12: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 267

some areas of incongruity wereidentified. The first divergence was intheir opinion on scope of rewards.While the organisation consideredformal reward platforms as non-monetary rewards, employees broughtevery rewarding aspect of work withinthe scope of such rewards. There wereno issues regarding the �token� used inrewarding. Employees asserted that giftvouchers or items worth a few thousandrupees did not make any difference tothem; it was the value of recognitionattached with these rewards which wassignificant. An important area ofdivergence was identif ied in theperceived value of informal rewardprograms for the employees and theemployers. Employees held informalrecognition like praise or a note ofthanks from senior manager asimportant to them, while the organi-sation found formal platforms as moresignificant in terms of the impact onemployee motivation. This discrepancycan have serious impli-cations for theemployer-employee relations. Theimportance of informal programs foremployees indicates that there shouldbe more emphasis on informal ways ofrewarding.

As regards customization of rewards,employees were keen on it whileorganizations felt that it would entaillosing objectivity. Since customizationto individual employee needs was opento subjective interpretations and couldchallenge the neutrality of the system,organizations preferred setting standardsand maintaining uniformity across thesystem.

Difference of opinion was alsoobserved towards the issue of employeeinvolvement in designing of rewardprograms. While employees were willingto participate, employers wereapprehensive of the feasibility of suchan initiative. Congruence between em-ployees and the organization wasidentified in their opinion towardsmonetary rewards. Both agreed thatmonetary rewards had to be competitiveand that no organization could afford topay less than the market rate. In thewords of a manager, �if you are notcompetitive as a pay master, there areso many hunters waiting for goodtalent.� However, emphasizing theimportance of non-monetary rewards,both asserted that such rewards wereequally important and that both thereward types had to act in closeassociation. To quote a sales-HRmanager, �Non-monetary, or monetary,both are extremely important; I can�t doone without the other. They have to gohand in hand. I don�t think one can say,do only monetary or non-monetary.�Non-monetary rewards were said toreinforce the organizational values inemployees and make the workingpleasant and easier. These rewards

Employees held informalrecognition like praise or a note ofthanks from senior manager asimportant to them, while theorganisation found formalplatforms as more significant interms of the impact on employeemotivation.

Page 13: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

268 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

presented platforms where desiredbehaviours could be reinforced in theemployees. Recognition at variousforums, made employees feel that theorganization cared for them and thattheir efforts were being acknowledged.It was asserted by the managers that suchfeelings of belongingness and loyaltycould be developed only through the useof non-monetary rewards.

Monetary rewards, on the otherhand, were satisfying/hygiene factorsand their impact on employeemotivation was short-lived. In the wordsof an HR manager, �if you really askme how much time it takes for peopleto digest a monetary reward, it takesless than one minute. Even a promotionletter or an increment letter would takea minute to digest and the person wouldassume that he was on this salary forthe past fifty years. It just takes thatmuch time.� Employees did not thinkof monthly salary while doing the

monthly targets. It was the small cardgiven by the senior or an appreciationin a meeting that influenced theeveryday working the most. Non-monetary rewards were thus importantin day-to-day functioning of employeeswhile monetary rewards were importantfor doing justice to the transactioncontract between employee and theorganisation.

Inter-organization Differences

It was observed that the apparentdifferences between employee choicesand organizational practices were morerampant in the case of the Indianorganization and rare differences wereobserved in the foreign company. TheIndian organization espoused a culturewhich was low on recognition while theforeign company advocated a highprofile recognition structure. The inter-organization differences are summarizedin the Table 2.

Table 2 Inter-organization Differences

Indian Organization Foreign Organization

Top Management�s Emphasis Monetary Rewards Equally on Monetary Rewards andNon-monetary Rewards

Values Work Oriented People Oriented

Non-monetary Rewards Structure Limited Extensive

Celebration Low Emphasis Huge Emphasis

Recognition Rare Phenomenon Common Phenomenon

Employee�s View Non-monetary Rewards Non-monetary Rewards asas mere �Add-ons� Critical for Performance

Page 14: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 269

Seeking Congruence

In order to abridge the gap betweenthe existing employer-employeedifferences, employees suggested threesteps: a small survey of employeeopinions, initiation of an employeeinvolvement program and regular �skip-level meetings�. From the results of thestudy seven pointers to the designing ofrecognition programs can be made. Apeople-oriented work culture adds to theperceived value of any effort made bythe organization towards employeerecognition. Celebration as a part ofevery event energizes the workplace andcreates fervour around programs. Propercommunication of the program elimi-nates misinterpretations and presentstransparency. Sincere and timelydelivery adds to the meaning-fulness ofrecognition. Customization to theplausible extent develops withinemployees feelings of being cared by theorganization. Emphasis on informalrecognition helps develop a culture ofrecognition; with the onus of recognitionon the individual employee, informalprograms present a great opportunity tobuild excitement and add fun to theworkplace. Finally, good superior-subordinate relationship at workplace isthe harbinger of success of not just the

recognition program but every singleeffort towards creating a healthierworkplace.

Future Concerns

Some issues remain to be dealt within future researches. The present studytouched upon the individual demo-graphics as a factor influencing theindividual choices; it however remainsto be seen as to how psychologicalfactors can play a role in determiningemployee choices as regards non-monetary rewards. Moreover, limitedgeneralizations from the present studyleave scope for a quantitative study tobe initiated in the field so as to providegeneralizations in other contexts as well.In addition to this a comparative analysisof different sectors may add significantlyto the domain of employee recognition.Improvement in any field comes withsustained efforts.

References

Bessell Ian, Brad Dicks, Allen Wysocki & KarlKepner (2002), �Understanding Moti-vation: An Effective Tool for Managers�,Department of Food and ResourceEconomics, Florida Cooperative ExtensionService, Institute of Food and AgriculturalSciences, University of Florida,Gainesville, FL, retrieved on 26th April2006 http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/HR/HR01700.pdf

Barkema (1995), cited in Frey Bruno S & RetoJegen (1999), Working Paper No. 26,�Motivation Crowding Theory: A Surveyof Empirical Evidence�, retrieved on 11th

Jan 2006 http://www.landecon.cam.ac.uk/speer/iewwp026.pdf

Good superior-subordinate re-lationship at workplace is theharbinger of success of not just therecognition program but everysingle effort towards creating ahealthier workplace.

Page 15: non monetary rewards

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations

270 IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008

Condly Steven J, Richard e Clark & Harold DStolovitch (2003), �The Effects ofIncentives on Workplace Performance: AMeta-analytic Review of ResearchStudies�, Performance ImprovementQuarterly, 16 (3):46-63. Also available onhttp://www.ispi.org/pdf/Vol16_03_46condly.pdf reyreived on 11th May2006.

Crifo Patricia & Marc-Arthur Diaye (2004),�Incentives in Agency Relationships: To beMonetary or Non-monetary?�, retrieved on11th January 2006 from http://www.univ-vry.fr/PagesHtml/laboratoires/Epee/EPEE/colloques/CrifoDiaye-EPEE.pdf

Fisher, Martin (1998) How to Reward Your Staff:A Guide to Obtaining Better Performancethrough the Reward System, New Delhi,Kogan Page.

Frey Bruno S. & Reto Jegen (1999), WorkingPaper No. 26, �Motivation CrowdingTheory: A Survey of Empirical Evidence�,retrieved on 11 th Jan 2006 http://www.landecon.cam.ac.uk/speer/iewwp026.pdf

Graham Gerald (1990), cited in Nelson Bob(2001), �Factors that Encourage or Inhibitthe Use of Non-Monetary Recognition byU.S. Managers�, Ph.D. Thesis, retrieved on31st Jan 2006, www.nelson-motivation.com

Herzberg Frederick, Bernard Mausner, RichardO Peterson & Dora F Capwell (1957), JobAtti tudes: Review of Research andOpinion, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,Psychological Service of Pittsburgh http://essayarchive.com on 10th Dec 2005.

Jeffrey Scott (2003), retrieved on 23rd Dec. 2005http://www.maritzrewards.com/pdfs/site-benefits.pdf Copyright with The SITEFoundation.

Jurgensen Clifford E (1978), �Job Preferences(What Makes a Job Good or Bad?)�,Journal of Applied Psychology, 63 (3):267-76.

Keller Ellis O (1965), Management Development:A Series of Lectures & Articles, New Delhi,National Productivity Council.

Kovach Kenneth (1980), cited in Bessell Ian,Brad Dicks, AllenWysocki & Karl Kepner(2002) Understanding Motivation: AnEffective Tool for Managers, Departmentof Food and Resource Economics, FloridaCooperative Extension Service, Institute ofFood and Agricultural Sciences, Universityof Florida, Gainesville, FL, retrieved on26 th April 2006, http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/HR/HR01700.pdf

Lindhal Lawerence (1949), cited in Nelson Bob(2001), Factors that Encourage or Inhibitthe Use of Non-Monetary Recognition byU.S. Managers, Ph.D. Thesis, retrieved on31st Jan 2006, www.nelson-motivation.com

Luthans Fred & Alexander D. Stajkovic (2000),�The Impact of Recognition on EmployeePerformance: Theory, Research andPractice�, retrieved on 17th June 2006 fromhttp://www.sba.muohio.edu/management/mwAcademy/2000/38a.pdf

Martiz Poll on Employee Recognition, October(2005), BOSSES NOT �ON THE SAMEPAGE� AS EMPLOYEES REGARDINGRECOGNITION, Retrieved from http://www.recognition.org/associations/5847/files/maritz_poll_2005.pdf on April 4,2007.

Mayfield, Jacqueline Rowley, Milton RayMayfield & Jerry Kopf (1998), �TheEffects of Leader Motivating Language onSubordinate Performance and Job Satis-faction�, Human Resource Management,37(3&4):235-48.

Mottaz, Clifford J. (1985), �The RelativeImportance of Intrinsic and ExtrinsicRewards as Determinants of Work Satis-faction�, The Sociological Quarterly,26(3):365-85.

MOW International Research Team (1987), TheMeaning of Work, Academic Press.

NAER and WorldatWork, May (2005), Trends inEmployee Recognition 2005, Retrievedf r o m h t t p : / / w w w. r e c o g n i t i o n . o r g /associations/5847/filesNAER World%

Page 16: non monetary rewards

Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices & Organizational Practices

IJIR, Vol. 44, No. 2, October 2008 271

20at%20Work%20 Survey2005.pdfonApril 4, 2007.

Nelson Bob (2001), Factors that Encourage orInhibit the Use of Non-Monetary Reco-gnition by U.S. Managers, Ph.D. Thesis,retrieved on 31st Jan 2006, www.nelson-motivation .com

Roche, William J. & Neil L. Mackinnon (1970),�Motivating People with MeaningfulWork�, Harvard Business Review, May-June: 97.

Ronan, W.W. (1970), �Relative Importance of JobCharacteristics�, Journal of AppliedPsychology, 54(2):192-200.

Sharma Baldev R. (1989), Not by Bread Alone,New Delhi, Shri Ram Centre for IR&HR

Sharma Baldev R. & Rama J Joshi (2001),�Determinants of Organisational Commit-ment in a Manufacturing Organization inthe Private Sector�, Indian Journal ofIndustrial Relations Vol. 37(2).

Sheryl & Don Grimme (2006), retrieved on 11th

Jan 2006, http://www.employee-retention-hq.com/

Watson Wyatt Survey retrieved on 13th January2006 http://www.relojournal.com/current%20Issue/toc.htm

Wilson Valerie (1988), cited in Nelson Bob(2001), Factors that Encourage or Inhibitthe Use of Non-Monetary Recognition byU.S. Managers, Ph.D. Thesis, retrieved on31st Jan 2006, www.nelson-motivation.com

Yauz Nilay (2004), The Use of Non-MonetaryIncentives as a Motivational Tool: A SurveyStudy in a Public Organisation in Turkey,retrieved on 17TH June 2006 from http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12605141/index.pdf

Page 17: non monetary rewards