104 TOTAL REWARDS FOR TECHNICAL WORKERS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and the role of other rewards has become more prominent. This completes the review of the empirical work on rewards for R&D workers. We now turn to a consideration of its theoretical basis. A Theoretical Basis for Total Rewards To date, a sound, broadly accepted, theoretical base for the Total Rewards has not been presented, but some beginnings have been suggested. For example, O’Malley and Dolmat- Connell (2003) argue that three facets of commitment (organizational, occupational and beneficial) can form the basis of a “total relationship strategy” with employees. They demonstrate how the concept of commitment can underlie various management strategies that have to do with rewards. In another example, Kantor and Kao (2004) suggest that Total Rewards’ attention to a spectrum of rewards is consistent with long traditions of psychological and organizational theorizing going back through Lawler, Drucker and Maslow. The rewards included in Total Rewards run the gamut from personal and career growth (Maslow’s selfactualization need), through recognition and promotion (esteem needs), to benefits (security needs) and salary (to satisfy physiological and other needs). These approaches have some promise as avenues for providing a stronger conceptual basis for Total Rewards. However, Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964), given its good empirical support (Van Eerde and Thierry, 1996), can probably provide a more solid theoretical base. Expectancy theory proposes that workers will be motivated to exert a high level of effort in their work if they perceive that their efforts will lead to good performance (expectancy), that that performance is instrumental in obtaining the rewards offered by the organization (instrumentality), and that those rewards have significant positive valence (value) to the worker. These constructs can encompass Total Rewards concepts. Total Rewards proposes that organizations should offer their employees a number of rewards (not just pay and benefits) and should ascertain the relative values of those rewards to their workers so they can offer the most cost effective mix. In expectancy theory the value of rewards is called valence. The ascertaining of the value of rewards would, then, involve measuring the valences of the rewards which the organization might offer to workers. This could be done using the measuring techniques developed for the study of Expectancy Theory. Expectancy Theory is flexible in this consideration for it does not pre-specify any particular number or type of rewards but does specify that the more rewards there are of positive valence (assuming expectancy and instrumentality), the more motivated will be the workers. Expectancy Theory proposes the inclusion of as many rewards, and as many types of rewards, as the organization may wish to include, as does Total Rewards. Expectancy Theory, however, leads us beyond this prescription from the proponents of Total Rewards. Those proponents suggest that the value of rewards be measured and that the most valued rewards be offered (subject to a cost effectiveness consideration). They do not consider some of the subtleties suggested by Expectancy Theory. Expectancy Theory states that for motivation to occur employees must perceive expectancy and instrumentality while Total Medcof_ASAC2005 113
Rewards does not mention these considerations. The implication is that, for Total Rewards to work, the organization must make it clear to employees what rewards are offered and also how employees can access those rewards. The organization must also ensure that mechanisms are in place to ensure that employees who work hard and well actually get the rewards. Expectancy Theory shows that there is more to deploying Total Rewards than telling employees about the rewards available. For its part, Total Rewards introduces the idea of the cost effective rewards mix. Expectancy Theory provides no place in its framework for this consideration. This conceptual link between Expectancy Theory and Total Rewards suggests a broadening of the scope of both models. Expectancy theory has largely been applied to the question of how to motivate workers to work harder on their jobs. By linking it to total Rewards we open up the possibility of applying it to the question of how to motivate workers to choose one firm over another when seeking a job, and choosing to stay with a firm rather than moving to another. Since Expectancy theory is a theory about choice, it easily encompasses this particular set of choices. In choosing an organization, the worker, implicitly or explicitly, considers the valences of the rewards available from each, the expectancies and instrumentalities attached to each, and, therefore, the likelihood that those rewards will actually be attained. On the other hand, attaching Total Rewards to Expectancy Theory opens up the possibility of applying Total Rewards to questions of individual worker motivation to work hard. The conceptual route is now opened to consider how to add expectancies and instrumentalities to the Total Rewards package so that workers will do more than just join organizations, and stay with them, they will work hard at their jobs to continue to get their rewards. This discussion shows that although Total Rewards was conceived by practitioners who were primarily concerned with recruiting and retention issues, it can be given a sound theoretical basis in Expectancy Theory and shows promise for an extension into work motivation challenges. Implicit in these considerations is the need for further research on these possibilities. Conclusions The literature review in this paper suggests that a Total Rewards strategy should have business value in R&D. Most firms already offer rewards in all four categories, but most do not manage them optimally. This is of particular concern in R&D settings where data clearly indicate that career, personal development and the work itself are more important to R&D workers than to most others. R&D rewards strategy should give serious consideration to all four quadrants. A Total Rewards strategy has great potential to help improve the high turnover among technical workers that has been signalled by a number of authors (e.g. Cordero, DiTomasso and Farris, 1994; Kochanski and Ledford, 2001; Kochanski et al, 2003). A number of suggestions for the implementation of Total Rewards, based upon the literature review, have been provided. The linking of Total Rewards to Expectancy Theory introduced several considerations. Attention to expectancy and instrumentality in the implementation of total rewards was suggested as well as the application of Total Rewards to issues of individual work motivation. Medcof_ASAC2005 114
Page 1 and 2: ASAC 2005, Toronto, Canada John W.
Page 3 and 4: Proponents of Total Rewards have pa
Page 5 and 6: leave R&D for other parts of the fi
Page 7 and 8: person rather than by the job. Pay
Page 9: In the comparative empirical studie
Page 13 and 14: Diaz, M.D.S. and Gomez-Mejia, L.R.

104 TOTAL REWARDS FOR TECHNICAL WORKERS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?