This includes also performance-related remuneration schemes. The fallacy that monetary incentives does not lead to better outcomes than compensation advisors do I often experience that executives make the stimulatory effect of pecuniary incentives in question to speak very directly on the subject of money during the affected employees on the question of what do they motivate, come. Just when sales representatives, the due to their relatively independent work rather a lower social and emotional connection to the company have, experience has shown that plays a prominent role money as a motivator and a stimulation factor. Jorg Zeyringer: the results of my scientific investigation, attended by about 1,000 people from different sectors and different levels of the hierarchy, could my theses (regarding the strong effect of money as a motivator of author) not refute. On the contrary, there were other findings who spoke for this. Respondents were asked to select those 3 with the greatest influence on increasing the motivation to work from a list of 17 factors respectively.
As the by far most important factor turns out money. “A salary that corresponds to my performance and my work situation’ each commonly called first as well as second and third factor.” The American psychologist Ed Diener points in addition to the close relationship between money and happiness. The assumption that money not happy, do, must be revised at least partially! What do well-crafted remuneration systems the presence of targets is considered today undisputed requirement, give rise to any motivation. Objectives give a sense to the own action, distinguish the important from the unimportant, and steer the force on the defined priorities. Companies that lead their employees to target and reward, are more successful than others for nothing. Well done performance-related remuneration schemes are so goal-oriented, include many employees of the company in the variable remuneration and fasten on the personal results of the employee. Well-made remuneration systems make successful employees in his income from the weak and ineffective employees to leistungsgerechteren income by engaged he, differentiated. A pure fixed remuneration there is hard: who excludes individual performance bonuses, must pay higher salaries to successful employees, even at the risk of “hin, only momentary flash in the Pan” to ignite and the performance not permanently above “to keep. To read more click here: hybrid bikes.
“What do not want well-made remuneration systems: a watering can solution”, where all employees lump-sum are involved in the success of the company. Sprinkler proposes r.k. (interview December 2010 in the Manager seminar,), to connect one-third of the income of employees in the company’s success. Quite apart from the fact that labour courts see the maximum variable share of income of an employee between 25% and 30%, runs this proposal into the void: who wants to influence employee behavior, must fasten on individual performance. In addition, this collective remuneration approach basically contradicts our economic and social system, which is based just on individual performance and foresees individual income depending on the performance and competence of the individual. And also (as already mentioned): the reality is in the exact opposite direction, by more and more companies more and more employees in emphasizes performance and individual remuneration integrate more and more divisions.