企业绩效管理与员工激励外文文献翻译2015

企业绩效管理和员工激励是企业管理中的重要组成部分，对于提高企业的运营效率和员工的工作动力具有重要作用。

下面我们将介绍一些关于企业绩效管理和员工激励的参考文献，供大家参考。

一、企业绩效管理的参考文献1. Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. Harvard business review,70(1), 71-79.这篇文章主要介绍了平衡计分卡在企业绩效管理中的应用。

作者提出了以财务、客户、内部业务流程和学习与成长四个维度来衡量企业的绩效，这些维度能够全面地反映企业的经营状况，有助于企业制定合理的经营战略和目标。

2. Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F. (1998). Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction. Journal of accounting research, 36, 1-35. 这篇文章研究了非财务指标是否能成为企业财务绩效的领先指标。

作者以客户满意度作为非财务指标，发现客户满意度确实能够预示企业未来的财务表现，为企业绩效管理提供了新的思路。

3. Neely, A., Gregory, M., Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Operations ProductionManagement, 15(4), 80-116.这篇文章对企业绩效管理中的绩效测量系统进行了文献综述和研究议程的探讨。

员工激励机制外文文献员工激励机制外文文献有一个国外民意调查组织在研究以往二十年的数据后发现：在所有的工作分类中，员工们都将工资与收益视为最重要或次重要的指标。

工资能极大地影响员工行为一在何处工作及是否好好干。

因此，如何让员工从薪酬上得到最大的满意，成为现代企业组织应当努力把握的课题。

应该从以下方面把握：一、为员工提供有竞争力的薪酬，使他们一进门便珍惜这份工作，竭尽全力，把自己的本领都使出来。

支付最高工资的企业最能吸引并且留住人才，尤其是那些出类拔萃的员工。

这对于行业内的领先公司，尤其必要。

较高的报酬会带来更高的满意度，与之俱来的还有较低的离职率。

一个结构合理、管理良好的绩效付酬制度，应能留住优秀的员工，淘汰表现较差的员工。

二、重视内在报酬。

实际上，报酬可以划分为两类：外在的与内在的。

外在报酬主要指：组织提供的金钱、津贴和晋升机会，以及来自于同事和上级的认同。

而内在报酬是和外在报酬相对而言的，它是基于工作任务本身的报酬，如对工作的胜任感、成就感、责任感、受重视、有影响力、个人成长和富有价值的贡献等。

事实上，对于知识型的员工，内在报酬和员工的工作满意感有相当之大的关系。

因此，企业组织可以通过工作制度、员工影响力、人力资本流动政策来执行内在报酬，让员工从工作本身中得到最大的满足。

三、把收入和技能挂钩。

建立个人技能评估制度，以雇员的能力为基础确定其薪水，工资标准由技能最低直到最高划分出不同级别。

基于技能的制度能在调换岗位和引入新技术方而带来较大的灵活性，当员工证明自己能够胜任更高一级工作时，他们所获的报酬也会顺理成章地提高。

此外, 基于技能的薪资制度还改变了管理的导向，实行按技能付酬后，管理的重点不再是限制任务指派使其与岗位级别一致，相反，最大限度地利用员工己有技能将成为新的着重点。

这种评估制度最大的好处是能传递信息使员工关注自身的发展。

四、增强沟通交流。

现在许多公司采用秘密工资制，提薪或奖金发放不公开，使得员工很难判断在报酬与绩效之间是否存在着联系。

员工制度中译英文件对照翻译——华译网翻译公司提供中英文翻译版本请注意：对应英文版请见本文件后半部分。

本论文英文译文是多年前翻译的，目前我们公司增加了外籍校对环节，而且译者资历要求也提高了，所以目前的水平要远高于这个水平。

发布的文件仅作为语料素材供参考，不能作为英文译文模板等使用。

华译网翻译公司提供专业学术资料、法律资料、商务资料和技术资料翻译服务,本文件我们为某工厂翻译的员工制度和违纪和过失行为技术文件摘录内容，供参考，欢迎惠顾。

详细价格和译者资质以及论文翻译控制流程请登陆其官方网站/。

第七章、奖惩第二十五条、对员工奖励可分为三种：一、鼓励奖：目的鼓励品行端正，努力工作，考核合格的员工二、嘉奖：目的奖励品行端正，对公司有突出贡献的员工三、特别奖：目的表彰为公司连续服务2年以上、不断作出突出贡献的员工。

鼓励长期服务，保持员工队伍的稳定。

第二十六条、有下列情形之一者，给予鼓励奖一、品性端正，工作努力，完成重大或特殊事务者。

二、绩效考核，成绩优秀者。

三、热心服务，有具体事实者。

四、在艰苦条件下工作，卓有成效者。

第二十七条有下列情形之一者给予嘉奖一、对生产或管理制度提出改进建议，经采纳实施，卓有成效者。

二、遇有困难，勇于负责，处理得当者。

三、维护公司或工厂重大利益，避免重大损失者。

四、其他突出贡献者。

第二十八条、有下列情形之一给予特别奖一、连续为公司服务2年以上、在某项目中作出创造性努力，卓有成效。

二、有其他特殊贡献，足以为公司表率者。

第二十九条、第十三个月工资：凡每年12月31日在现行工资册上有名的正式员工，有资格得到第十三个月奖金。

对不遵守劳动纪律受处分或被解雇的员工，公司有权不发此奖金。

凡遇此情况该员工的部门经理应以书面形式通知员工。

一、计算方法：12月份工资和福利津贴总额除以12，再乘以该年度连续工作的月份数。

如在某个月份中间开始工作：1、某月15号或以前开始工作者，算一个整月。

2、某月15号以后开始工作者，该月不计算在内。

人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Performance Management: Reconciling Competing PrioritiesIan ZiskinFour HR thought leaders from academia— John Boudreau of the USC Center for Effective Organizations, Chris Collins of the Cornell Center for Advanced HR Studies, Pat Wright of the Moore College of Business at the University of South Carolina, and Dave Ulrich of University of Michigan and the RBL Group — engaged in discussions on Performance Management with Ian Ziskin, President, EXec EXcel Group LLC and Board member, HR People & Strategy. Ian asked John, Chris,Pat, and Dave to share their perspectives on topics including:• What Performance Management is?• What makes the biggest difference to effective vs. ineffective Performance Management?• What the biggest sources of debate and disagreement have been regarding Performance Management over the years, and whether we have made any progress in resolving these issues？• If they were going to fix or kill anything about Performance Management, w hat it would be and why？• What big implications there are for future required changes to Performance Management in light of future work, workforce and workplace trends？Ziskin: There is a lot of talk in organizations about whether Performance Management is working effectively or ever has. What do you think Performance Management is?Collins: This may be the question of the year. Performance Management has become everything and therefore nothing. It serves so many purposes —compensation, feedback, talent development, succession, etc. — that it may not serve any purpose very well.Boudreau: It's an ongoing relationship to balance the need to evaluate people with the need to develop them. It's not about bromides, forms, scores, tools orsystems.Wright: Performance Management is about aligning behavior in a way that increases organizational effectiveness.Ulrich: I think we need to look at Performance Management from three levels: cultural, systems and personal. At the cultural level, it's about whether the organization judges people based on meritocracy (results), hierarchy (power) or relationships (connections). At the systems level, it's about determining whether people meet or miss objectives. At the personal level, it's about assessing the individual's dedication to deliver both financial and social results.Ziskin: Given your point of view about Performance Management, what makes the biggest difference to whether it is effective vs. ineffective?Collins: It starts with having a culture of openness, honesty and real feedback —and then holding people accountable. This process begins and ends with good leaders, and all of our money should be invested in developing leaders to lead, rather than spending money on new Performance Management systems and tools.Boudreau: Effectiveness rests in the skills and motivations of the people involved, not in the Performance Management system itself. It is particularly important to create a shared framework and priorities between managers and their employees.Ulrich: The four generic steps of Performance Management have remained relatively stable over time: set standards, assess against those standards, allocate consequences and provide feedback. Improvements in the effectiveness of Performance Management have come from enabling external stakeholders to provide input on standards and performance, making the performance discussion more about the future than the past, using technology to simplify the process, tailoring the consequences to better reflect individual employee contributions and value, and accommodating both team as well as individual feedback.Wright: Bad tools, bad evaluations, bad feedback and bad links to reward systems lead to bad Performance Management.Ziskin: If you look back over the years of debate about Performance Management, what one or two things stand out in your mind as the biggest sources ofdebate and disagreement?Boudreau: The biggest debate has been about what are we trying to achieve? It's always been about development of people vs. evaluation of their performance, and whether these two different priorities can be reconciled.Collins: Do you separate performance feedback from compensation, and how do you do both? We also need to learn to separate the discussion about current performance from the future — future roles and future performance requirements.Wright: The debate continues over simplifying tools vs. customizing unique tools to specific jobs, roles, situations and individuals.Ulrich: There are a number of old debates and some new debates. The old debates include Performance Management should be used for discussing financial results or development potential (yes to both), whether we should measure results as well as behavior (yes to both), whether managers should be accountable to do performance reviews (yes), and who should own Performance Management— the line or HR (the line owns it, HR is the architect).Ziskin: Have we made any progress in resolving the debate over these issues?Boudreau: We have made progress in something, such as the growing recognition that effective Performance Management is much less about forms and much more about relationships.Collins: I am gravely disappointed in the progress we've made in the past 20 years, especially in accommodating new ways of working such as more distributed, virtual work. We also have not made enough progress in accounting for team performance instead of just individual performance.Wright: We are making progress in linking results, behaviors and rewards. I'd say we are beginning to achieve best principles in Performance Management, but we have not yet achieved best practices.Ulrich: The following new debates are more interesting to me than the old debates I mentioned above, and even though we are beginning to make some progress, we need much more: how we simplify the process, how we have meaningful personal conversations between leaders and employees and how we build a performanceculture where meritocracy is expected.Ziskin: In light of the Performance Management debates and related mixed progress we have discussed, if you were going to fix or kill one thing related to Performance Management, what it would it by and why?Collins: I would fix Performance Management by investing in better leaders giving better feedback, rather than trying to fix Performance Management by investing in better tools.Boudreau: I would kill the debate about Performance Management forms, tools and technology enhancements, and instead put more than 80 percent of our resources into teaching and developing leaders and employees to get the most out of the performance feedback discussion.Ulrich: I would kill Performance Management complexity, and simplify the process. Sometimes, the process becomes the end itself, and there is means/end inversion.Wright: I would kill the parochialism that comes from my way, my tool and my process. There is a lot to be learned from how others are doing Performance Management.Ziskin: When you consider the future of work, the workplace and the workforce —and how all these things are changing and affecting business performance — what one or two big implications are there for required changes to Performance Management in the future?Ulrich: The biggest implications for the future I see are simplification of the Performance Management process and more outside/in perspective whereby Performance Management is more connected to input from external stakeholders.Wright: We will see a greater emphasis on evaluating results, the end product, rather than behavior, because global dispersion of work will make it much more difficult to directly observe behavior.Boudreau: As a result of increasingly virtual, remote, temporary and independent work, performance assessment can no longer only be done by leaders — it will also be done by others including peers and employees themselves. PerformanceManagement will no longer be the province of leaders.Collins: Performance Management is going in the direction of more frequent, more transparent, more virtual, more raters and more team-based.Ziskin: Based on insights from our academic experts, as well as from my own experience, if you are working to reconcile the competing priorities associated with Performance Management, think about the following guidelines:• Simplify and de-emphasize forms and process in favor of improving the quality of relationships and conversation between leaders and employees• Accommodate trends toward more virtual and flexible work and changing demographics thorough Performance Management approaches that emphasize transparency, frequency and input from a broader range of internal and external constituents• Move from a relatively narrow focus on Performance Management to a broader emphasis on Performance CulturePeople & Strategy. 2013, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p24-25. 2p.译文：绩效管理：协调竞争的优先事项Ian Ziskin来自学术界的四位HR思想领袖：在南加州大学中心所研究有效组织的John Boudreau、在康奈尔大学高级人力资源研究中心工作的Chris Collins、在南卡罗来纳大学摩尔商学院的Pat Wright以及在密歇根大学和RBL集团工作的Dave Ulrich，与Ian总裁（掌管Excel集团有限责任公司、董事会成员、HR人员和策略）从事绩效管理事务。

员工激励的著作文献英文回答：The Significance of Employee Motivation in the Workplace.Employee motivation plays a crucial role in shaping the success of an organization. It directly impacts employee productivity, engagement, and retention, which in turn influences the overall organizational performance. Various theories and models have been developed over the years to understand and enhance employee motivation. Here are some notable works that have significantly contributed to this field of study:1. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Proposed by psychologist Abraham Maslow, this theory suggests that human needs follow a hierarchical order, from basic physiological needs to self-actualization. As individuals fulfill their lower-level needs, they become motivated topursue higher-level ones.2. Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory: Psychologist Frederick Herzberg distinguished between hygiene factors (related to job dissatisfaction) and motivators (related to job satisfaction). Hygiene factors include salary, working conditions, and company policies, while motivators encompass achievement, recognition, and personal growth.3. Vroom's Expectancy Theory: Developed by Victor Vroom, this theory posits that motivation is influenced by an individual's beliefs about the relationship between effort, performance, and rewards. When employees perceive a clear link between their efforts and desired outcomes, they are more likely to be motivated.4. Equity Theory: Proposed by J. Stacey Adams, this theory suggests that employees are motivated to maintain a fair balance between their inputs (effort, skills, experience) and outcomes (rewards, recognition). Employees who perceive inequity may experience dissatisfaction and reduced motivation.5. Goal-Setting Theory: This theory emphasizes the importance of setting specific, challenging, and achievable goals. When employees have clear goals and feedback ontheir progress, they are more likely to be motivated and engaged in their work.6. Reinforcement Theory: Based on principles of operant conditioning, this theory states that positive reinforcement (rewards) and negative reinforcement (avoiding punishments) can shape behavior. Managers can use reinforcement techniques to encourage desired behaviors and increase employee motivation.7. Self-Determination Theory: Developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, this theory focuses on the intrinsic motivation that arises from satisfying the needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness. When these needs are fulfilled, employees experience greater motivation andwell-being.中文回答：员工激励著作文献。

文献出处：Barney J B. The employee’s incentive s mechanism in small and medium-sized enterprise[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2016, 31(7): 464-476.原文The employee’s incentive s mechanism in small and medium-sized enterpriseBarney J BAbstract"Incentive" is a psychological term, psychologists point out that all behavior is caused by the motivation of associated with it, as one of the person's state of mind, this motive for human behavior has the effect of reinforcement, vertebral move and inspire, known as a motivation. Incentive is mainly to inspire people to inner potential, cause people intelligence, mobilize people's enthusiasm and creativity. In this paper, the construction of small and medium-sized enterprise employees incentive mechanism problem. From the use of different ideas, different angles, for enterprise employees incentive. Staff incentive mechanism is through the system, rational system to reflect the interaction between incentive subjects with incentive object, is the enterprise connect the ideal into reality. Small business managers should learn effective research method for reference, targeted to solve their practical problems, and strive for a breakthrough in terms of theory. In the research and construction of small and medium-sized enterprise incentive mechanism on the road to constantly innovation, divergent thinking, from surface to inside, and realize the goal of research. And summarizes a set of suitable for small and medium-sized enterprises for effective incentive mechanism, to promote the vigorous development of small and medium-sized enterprises.Keywords: small and medium-sized enterprises, incentive mechanism, staff requirementsIntroductionIn the increasingly fierce competition, more and more small and medium-sized enterprises begin to realize enterprise's competition is talented person's competition,actually only attach importance to talents, pay attention to the development of human resources management, to constantly improve their own core competitiveness, make the enterprise in the incentive competition advantage. However, the construction of the incentive mechanism is the core of the construction of enterprise human resources management, and enterprise operation of each link, and employees are closely linked. Use reasonable effective employee incentive mechanism to attract talent, formed a set of scientific, perfect enterprise candidates, choose and employ persons, cultivate people's human resources management system, is to motivate employees continuously enterprising, the key to motivate staff morale; Is in motivating talents plays an important role in promoting the competition to attract talent, retain talent; Is to guide employees to establish scientific, and the basis of the strategic target of enterprise organization goal is consistent. But most of the small and medium-sized enterprise development history is short, the lack of management experience, management system is not mature, the understanding of human resource management is not deep, incentive mechanism is not sound, for enterprise employees cannot give a sufficient motivation, to arouse the enthusiasm of employees, lead to the market competition of enterprises is relatively weak. Therefore, how to strengthen the management of human resources, to establish scientific and effective employee incentive mechanism, and reasonable use of scientific and effective incentive mechanism, attract talent, talent of education development, to prevent the brain drain becomes the key to enterprise core competitiveness.In the face of increasingly fierce market competition, establish a scientific and reasonable employee incentive mechanism for the production and business operation and sustainable development of enterprises play a vital role. Only retain talent, and fully mobilize the enthusiasm and initiative of employees, play employees' creativity, to constantly strengthen the enterprise core competitive power, to give priority to occupy talent highland, finally to make small and medium-sized enterprises in the fierce competition of modern society.Summary of incentive and incentive mechanismThe meaning of incentiveAs a social people are engaged in all behaviors are caused by some kind of motivation, desire, motivation, desire is a kind of mental state, through the role of the mental state can inspire people to dig their own potential, fight, fight for the realization of self-worth. Incentive mechanism as one of the important content of enterprise human resources management has an irreplaceable role. In the enterprise staff work enthusiasm, motivation and ability to work effectively and use is one of the important factors of enterprise sustainable development, enterprise managers through scientific and effective means and ways of reasonable use of limited resources, to understand employees at the level of the rationalization of demand and, in turn, meet the demand of employees of rationalization, to motivate, inspire and guide the enterprise staff's work enthusiasm, goal setting and enhanced to enterprise's loyalty, to achieve the strategic goals of the enterprise management process. Motivation mainly includes the trigger a desire, guide the target, etc.The meaning of employee incentive mechanismEmployee motivation is to use some kind of external cause, use all kinds of effective measures to meet the diverse needs of employees or restrict, and through certain rules and regulations to regulate and constraint, penalties, employees, motivate employees, to constraint employee morale and employee motivation, arouse the enthusiasm of work, desire, etc., make the person has an inner motivated employees can form a certain goal, and keep a high mood and actively state to the desired goal of psychological process. This process relies on a system we defined as incentive mechanism can also be called incentive system. Incentive system concrete application in the process of the employee's incentive, in the process of the interaction, constraints, and incentive results closely linked to a kind of comprehensive function. In terms of enterprise employees incentive mechanism its essence lies in through scientific, perfect system construction, promote employees in the direction of the organization to make persistent efforts. Staff incentive mechanism in the enterprise application is urge employees strive to achieve the strategic goals of the enterprise incentive system.The type of staff incentive mechanismIn the era of global competition and knowledge-based economy, more and moresmall and medium-sized enterprises gradually realized that the competition between the enterprises is the result of the talent competition, talent as a resource is the first of all resources. The sustainable development of small and medium-sized enterprises, fundamentally, mainly depends on the enterprise the competitive advantage of human resources. Employee’s incentive mechanism as one of the main content of human resource management, contains a lot of ways, it not only through the every link of the enterprise, but also closely connected with the employee's personal interests. Employee incentive way is not the same, one of the main forms are:Material aspects of the stimulusPhysiological needs is a kind of demand at the lowest level of all the requirements, it is mainly refers to people in their daily lives for clothing, housing, food, travel tools, air, water and other basic living needs and physiological needs. Physiological demand is people in social activities, maintain the basic survival motivation, the basis of the material aspects of the incentive is to be able to make people physiological demand and life needs are met. The implementation of the material incentive is can make employees work power source. Material things incentives also include wages, salary, promotion, bonuses, welfare, insurance, reward housing, echo managers in the use of employee wages, bonuses and other incentives in terms of money, should be aware of the value of money between employees have different value, cannot treat as the same, and each employee to earn the satisfaction is not the same, therefore, when using monetary rewards not should adopt the principle of distribution of average, should be targeted.Goal setting incentiveGoal setting incentive, namely through the guide staff according to their own actual situation to set realistic goals, causing employee morale, motivate and inspire employees to complete the goal setting and constantly struggle, make employees the purpose of energy. Staff has constantly encouraged by power and passion, striving to make progress constantly asked him to pursue higher goals. Managers in the process of human resource management, be good at discover employees inner expectations and goals, and moderate guide employees to achieve their goals and formulatedetailed implementation steps, the corresponding work objectives for each employee, the task assigned to each employee, can give employees the invisible pressure, in turn, into power, strengthening the staff's sense of responsibility. When employees own goal is to realize the satisfaction of, will strengthen their awareness of the enterprise goal, to strengthen the enterprise's loyalty, thus make the enterprise organizational goals be implemented step by step.The respection of incentiveThe respection of incentive is one of the most basic of incentives, is to speed up the staff passion of the catalyst. Respect for every employee, to win the respect of each employee and loyalty. As a manager to respect employees at all levels of the independent personality and value orientation, in particular, pay attention to the demands of grass-roots staff, timely grasp and meet the needs of staff rationalization, is the embodiment of the enterprises fully respect for employees, at the same time, the staff work hard, obey organization arrangement, is the employee feedback and enterprise managers' respect and obedience. Respect include mutual respect between employees, mutual respect between leadership and staff, between enterprises and enterprises such as mutual respect, the main performance for mutual respect between superiors and subordinates, friendly atmosphere of mutual respect and promote the affection between staff, staff and leadership, strong force mouth among employees, between employees and leadership, make the enterprise team to better cooperation, strengthen team cohesion.The employee involvement of incentiveStaff participation motivation mainly refers to the enterprise should pay attention to the cultivation of enterprise employee ownership. Now the employees have to participate in the management of the appeal. As managers, establish reasonable mechanism of employee involvement, advice for mechanism and system of employee ownership, create and provide opportunity for employees to provide reasonable Suggestions for the development of enterprises, and the proportion of adopting staff have put forward opinions and Suggestions, and to adopt the opinions and Suggestions of certain rewards to employees, make employees really participate in themanagement of the enterprise, enhance the staff of the enterprise belonging, at the same time make the employees get the realization of self-worth, make employees in respect of expectations, the realization of self-worth, got fully meet the desire. At the same time, also can create more effective value for the enterprise. Can also set up the system of mutual selection between staff and departments, which respect the wishes of employees, allows employees to have jobs initiative, options, and conducive to business to choose jobs suitable for working people.译文中小企业员工激励机制研究Barney J B摘要“激励”是一个心理学词汇，心理学家指出人的所有行为是由与其相关联的动机所引起的，这种动机作为人的精神状态之一，对人类的行为有强化、椎动和激发的作用，人们称之为激励。

The Dilemma of Performance AppraisalPeter Prowse and Julie ProwseMeasuring Business Excellence,V ol.13 Iss:4,pp.69 - 77AbstractThis paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. The authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.This paper willevaluatethe aims and methodsof appraisal, thedifficulties encountered in the appraisalprocess. It also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisaland move from he psychological approachesof analysistoamorecritical realisation ofapproaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.13.1IntroductionThis paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. It will start by evaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (Psychological tradition, Management by Objectives, Motivation and Development).It will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. It will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. The paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.This chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (MBO) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. It will outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. The outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. It will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the North American and the United Kingdom) evidence to evaluate the HRM development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.13.2 What is Performance Management?The first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of Performance Management. Armstrong and Barron(1998:8) define performance management as: A strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by Improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams And individual performance.13.2.1 Performance AppraisalAppraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. The use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the USA and UK were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formalperformance management system (Armstrong and Baron, 1998:200).There has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. Between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in UK.What is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 WERS survey (seeTable 13.1).Clearly the use of Appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the UK workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.13.2.2 The Purpose of AppraisalsThe critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？Researched and used in practice throughout organizations? The purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. Firstly their purpose. Randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. Appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually annual,supported by standardised forms/paperwork.The key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance is provided by the linemanager.The three key questions for quality of feedback:1. What and how are observations on performance made?2. Why and how are they discussed?3. What determines the level of performance in the job?It has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. This has been defined as the “Bradford Approach” which places a high priority on appraisal skills development (Randell, 1994). This approach is outlined in Fig. 13.1 whichidentifies the linkages betweeninvolving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..13.2.3 Historical Development of AppraisalThe historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of approaches.Formal observation of individual work performance was reported in Robert Owens’s Scottish factory inNew Lanarkin the early 1800s (Cole, 1925). Owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the Super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).The twentieth centuryled to F.W. Taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (Taylor, 1964). The 1930sTraits Approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.This was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. Later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.The evaluation also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (Mair, 1958).In the 1940s Behavioural Methods were developed. These included Behavioural Anchored Rating Scales (BARS); Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS); Behavioural Evaluation Scales (BES); critical incident;job simulation. All these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average orneeds to improve or poor.These ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. It would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential.Post1945 developed into the Results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (MBO). This provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (Wherry, 1957).The deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. It also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.In the 1960s the developmentof Self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in the discussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. Until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.In the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate power relationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (Redman and Snape, 1992). The final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.13.2.4 Measures of PerformanceThe dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. Quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. The introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992).Performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and Learning and Growth. Performance standards also included qualitative measures Which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.In terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.The debates will be discussed later in the paper.13.3 Criticism of AppraisalsCritiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. The dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.This “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting pur poses of appraisal (Strebler et al, 2001). Appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. These conflicts withassessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (Bach, 2005:301).Employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their current performance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(Newton and Findley, 1996:43).This conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an understanding counsell or which Randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.Appraisal Manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence fromMcGregor that managers are reluctant to make an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a sit could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (McGregor, 1957).One consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.In a study of senior managers by Long neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.The findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (Longeneckeret al., 1987).There are methods of further bias beyond Longenecker’s evidence. The polit ical judgements and they have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (ACAS, 1996).Some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. In this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .A particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .A range of studies in both the US and UK have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (Alimo-Metcalf, 1991;White, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(Geddes and Konrad, 2003). Suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.The second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. This is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about management control(Newton and Findley, 1996;Townley, 1993). It argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. This develops the literature of Foucault using power and surveillance. This literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (Healy, 1997) and University professionals(Townley, 1990).This evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as a method of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . However, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (Bach, 2005:306).One of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (Folgeretal.,1992).This was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there needed to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. The sources of rater bias and errors can be resolvedby improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.However there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the organization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. Secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appraisal are rated by a “political metaphor”(Hart le, 1995).This “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. This becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee performance .Organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to satisfy. This means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.This perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.This means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. The approaches of the “test” and “political” metaphors of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objec tivity and judgement of employee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.The issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?13.3.1 Solutions to Lack of Objectivity of AppraisalGrint(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with McGregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. The validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.This approach is also suggested to remove gender bias in appraisal ratings against women in appraisals (Fletcher, 1999). The solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. This argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. The solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.However, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.There are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity asWalker and Smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.There are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.The contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(Fletcher and Williams, 1996). The evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (Townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the UK such as the national health Service (NHS)is the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.One further concern is the openness of appraisal related to employee reward which we now discuss.13.3.2 Linking Appraisals with Reward ManagementAppraisal and performance management have been inextricably linked to employee reward since the development of strategic human resource management in the 1980s. The early literature on appraisal linked appraisal with employee control (Randell, 1994;Grint, 1993;Townley, 1993, 1999) and discussed the use of performance related reward to appraisals. However therecent literature has substituted the chapter titles employee “appraisal” with “performance management”(Bach, 2005; Storey, 2007) and moved the focus on performance and performance pay and the limits of employee appraisal. The appraisal and performance pay link has developed into debates to three key issues:The first issue is has performance pay related to appraisal grown in use?The second issue is what type of performance do we reward?and the final issue is who judges management standards?The first discussion on influences of growth of performance pay schemes is the assumption that increasing linkage between individual effort and financial reward increases performance levels. This linkage between effort and financial reward increasing levels of performance has proved an increasing trend in the public and private sector (Bevan and Thompson, 1992;Armstrong and Baron, 1998). The drive to increase public sector performance effort and setting of targets may even be inconsistent in the experiences of some organizational settings aimed at achieving long-term targets(Kessler and Purcell, 1992;Marsden, 2007). The development of merit based pay based on performance assessed by a manager is rising in the UK Marsden (2007)reported that the: Use of performance appraisals as a basis for merit pay are used in65 percent of public sector and 69 percent of the private sector employees where appraisal covered all nonmanagerial staff(p.109).Merit pay has also grown in use as in 1998 20% of workplaces used performance related schemes compared to 32% in the same organizations 2004 (Kersley et al., 2006:191). The achievements of satisfactory ratings or above satisfactory performance averages were used as evidence to reward individual performance ratings in the UK Civil Service (Marsden, 2007).Table 13.2 outlines the extent of merit pay in 2004.The second issue is what forms of performance is rewarded. The use of past appraisal ratings as evidence of achieving merit-related payments linked to achieving higher performance was the predominant factor developed in the public services. The evidence on Setting performance targets have been as Kessler (2000:280) reported “inconsistent within organizations and problematic for certain professional or less skilled occupations where goals have not been easily formulated”. There has been inconclusive evidence from organizations on the impact of performance pay and its effectiveness in improving performance. Evidence from a number of individual performance pay schemes report organizations suspending or reviewing them on the grounds that individual performance reward has produced no effect in performance or even demotivates staff(Kessler, 2000:281).More in-depth studies setting performance goals followed by appraisal on how well they were resulted in loss of motivation whilst maintaining productivity and achieved managers using imposing increased performance standards (Marsden and Richardson, 1994). As Randell(1994) had highlighted earlier, the potential objectivity and self-criticism in appraisal reviews become areas that appraisees refuse to acknowledge as weaknesses with appraisers if this leads to a reduction in their merit pay.Objectivity and self reflection for development becomes a weakness that appraises fail to acknowledge as a developmental issue if it reduces their chances of a reduced evaluation that will reduce their merit reward. The review of civil service merit pay (Makinson, 2000)reported from 4major UK Civil Service Agencies and the National Health Service concluded that existing forms of performance pay and performance management had failed to motivate many staff.The conclusions were that employees found individual performance pay divisive and led to reduced willingness to co-operate with management ,citing managerial favorites and manipulation of appraisal scores to lower ratings to save paying rewards to staff (Marsden and French, 1998).This has clear implications on the relationship between line managers and appraises and the demotivational consequences and reduced commitment provide clear evidence of the danger to linking individual performance appraisal to reward in the public services. Employees focus on the issues that gain key performance focus by focusing on specific objectives related to key performance indicators rather than all personal objectives. A study of banking performance pay by Lewis(1998)highlighted imposed targets which were unattainable with a range of 20 performance targets with narrow short term financial orientatated goals. The narrow focus on key targets and neglect of other performance aspects leads to tasks not being delivered.This final issue of judging management standards has already highlighted issues of inequity and bias based on gender (Beyer, 1990; Chen and DiTomasio, 1996; Fletcher, 1999). The suggested solutions to resolved Iscrimination have been proposed as enhanced interpersonal skills training are increased equitable use of 360 degree appraisal as a method to evaluate feedback from colleagues as this reduces the use of the “political metaphor”(Randell, 1994;Fletcher, 1999).On measures linking performance to improvement require a wider approach to enhanced work design and motivation to develop and enhance employee job satisfaction and the design of linkages between effort and performance are significant in the private sector and feedback and awareness in the public sector (Fletcher and Williams, 1996:176). Where rises be in pay were determined by achieving critical rated appraisal objectives, employees are less self critical and open to any developmental needs in a performance review.13.4 ConclusionAs performance appraisal provides a major potential for employee feedback that could link strongly to increasing motivation ,and a opportunity to clarify goals and achieve long term individual performance and career development why does it still suffers from what Randell describes as a muddle and confusion which still surrounds the theory and practice?There are key issues that require resolution and a great deal depends on the extent to which you have a good relationship with your line manager . Barlow(1989)argued `if you get off badly with your first two managers ,you may just as well forget it (p. 515).The evidence on the continued practice of appraisals is that they are still institutionally elaborated systems of management appraisal and development is significant rhetoric in the apparatus of bureaucratic control by managers (Barlow, 1989). In reality the companies create, review, change and even abolish appraisals if they fail to develop and enhance organisational performance(Kessler, 2000). Despite all the criticism and evidence the critics have failed to suggest an alternative for a process that can provide feedback, develop motivation, identify training and potential and evidence that can justify potential career development and justify reward(Hartle, 1997).绩效考核的困境Peter Prowse and Julie Prowse摘要本文旨在用绩效考核方法来解决绩效管理的困境。

员工激励理论外文文献及翻译员工激励理论外文文献及翻译One-to-one-management companiesare run -- in a timely inversion of John Adams's ideal -- as organizations of men (and women), not of laws. Nonetheless, a few laws, or at least cultural traits, appear to govern many such organizations. Together those traits create an environment where employees' needs are known, sometimes anticipated, and served, justas customers' needs are known, sometimes anticipated, and served in CRM-focused organizations. What follows is a look at the rules by which one-to-one-management companies operate[2].3.2 It's All in the DetailHow do you build morale and a sense of corporate responsibility? In surprisingly small ways. Standing in the kitchen at Eze Castle Software, CEO Sean McLaughlin watches as one of his programmers sets milk and cookies on a table. It's 2:30 on a Wednesday afternoon. "Hang on, Parvathy," McLaughlin says to the employee as he opens the refrigerator door and pulls out an apple pie. "Put this out, too." When Parvathy is done in the kitchen, she flips some switches, andthe lights flicker all over the fifth floor. Almost instantly, programmers leave their cubicles and make a beeline for thekitchen.Then Parvathy jogs up a staircase and flashes the lights on the sixth floor. Account managers, salespeople, and assorted techies come downstairs and join their colleagues in the kitchen. When they arrive, McLaughlin is at the center of the steadily building crowd, dishing out the pie. Around him conversations spring up between colleagues who work in different departments. The topics range from work to social life to politics. Ten minutes later the lights flash again and it's back to work for the 90 employees in the Boston office of Eze.What's so remarkable about the staff of a developer of securities-trading software with $13 million in revenues taking daily milk-and-cookies breaks? Not much -- until you consider that the practice is part of a cultural shift engineered by the CEO, a shift that has profoundly changed the way he and his employees relate toone another. Perhaps more significant, the changes have affected how employees deal with the myriad little details that keep the six-year-old company grounded.原文请找腾讯3249114六-维^论,文.网Eze's transformation began last year, when McLaughlin realized to his chagrin that his once small and collegial company had -- because of accelerated growth -- begun acting like a large corporation. His employees no longer knew one another, and he himself was increasingly vague about who some of the new faces were. "In the early days I could get to know everyone," saysMcLaughlin.However, the CEO was most annoyed by the fact that his employees -- both old and new -- were beginning to behave with large-company sloppiness rather than with start-up frugality. "Back when we were small, if someone sent a FedEx, we all knew how much that was costing the company," McLaughlin says. He recalls noticing that things were changing when one employee approved paying a contractor $100 a month to water the company's five plants. Then there were rising charges from the company's Internet service provider because of excessive traffic on the corporate T1 line. The cause? Employees were downloading MP3 files to listen to music during the workday. It frustrated McLaughlin that employees weren't taking responsibilityfor their actions and for the ways in which those actions affected the company's bottom line[2].But last summer two things happened that spurred McLaughlin to make some changes.First, the Boston office lost both of its administrative assistants. One assistant quit and the other left a few weeks later. The two had stocked the supply room, sorted the mail, and welcomed visitors. The dual departures wreaked havoc. "The kitchen was out of milk, we didn't have any pens in the supply cabinet, the reception area looked like crap," McLaughlin says.Then came the World Trade Center attacks. Though McLaughlin had long been brooding on how to reverse Eze's fat-cat habits, he had yet to act. He says that 9-11, and the "what are my priorities" thinking it engendered, "created an environment where it was easy for me to initiate a change."The change he had in mind was inspired by a visit to his daughter's kindergarten class. There he saw how the teacher divided the cleanup tasks among the children by posting a rotating "chore wheel." McLaughlin thought the wheel was just the thing to clean up the mess and teach his employees a little corporate responsibility. But he also wanted to institute something that would help improve camaraderie. That's where another kindergarten institution, the milk-and-cookies breaks, came in. "I wanted to build relationships among the employees, to make them feel more company morale," he says.上一页[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] 下一页。

绩效报酬与对高层管理的激励【外文翻译】外文翻译原文Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives.Material Source: EBSCO Author: Michael C· Jensen The conflict of interest between shareholders of a publicly owned corporation and the corporation’s chief executive officer (CEO)is a classic example of a principal-agent problem. If shareholders had complete information regarding the CEO’s activities and the firm’s investment opportunities, they could design a contract specifying and enforcing the managerial action to be taken in each state of the world. Managerial actions and investment opportunities are not, however, perfectly observable by shareholders; indeed ,shareholders do not often know what actions the CEO can take or which of these actions will increase shareholder wealth. In these situations, agency theory predicts that compensation policy will be designed to give the manager incentives to select and implement actions that increase shareholder wealth.Shareholders want CEOs to take particular actions—for example, deciding which issue to work on, which project to pursue, and which to drop—whenever the expected return on the action exceeds the expected costs. But the CEO compares only his private gain and cost from pursuing a particular activity. If one abstracts from the effects of CEO risk aversion, compensation policy that ties the CEO’s welfare to shareholder wealth helps align the private and social costs and benefits of alternative actions and thus provides incentives for CEOs to take appropriate actions. Shareholder wealth is affected by many factors inaddition to the CEO, including actions of other executives and employees, demand and supply conditions, and public policy. It is appropriate, however ,to pay CEOs on the basis of shareholder wealth since that is the objective of shareholders.There are many mechanisms through which compensation policy can provide value-increasing incentives, including performance-based bonuses and salary revisions, stock options, and performance-based dismissal decisions. The purpose of this paper is to estimate the magnitude of the incentives provided by each of these mechanisms. Our estimates imply that each $1,000 change in shareholder wealthcorresponds to an average i ncrease in this year’s and next year’s salary and bonus of about two cents. We also estimate the CEO wealth consequences associated with salary revisions,outstanding stock options, and performance-related dismissals; our upper-bound estimate of the total change in the CEO’s wealth from these sources that are under direct control of the board of directors is about 75￠per $1,000 change in shareholder wealth.Stock ownership is another way an executive’s wealth varies with the value of the firm. In our sample CEOs hold a median of about 0.25 percent of th eir firms’ common stock, including exercisable stock options and shares held by family members or connected trusts. Thus the value of the stock owned by the median CEO changes by $2.50whenever the value of the firm changes by$1,000.Therefore,our final all inclusive estimate of the pay-performance sensitivity—including compensation Dismissal, and stockholdings—is about $3.25 per $1,000 change in shareholder wealth.In large firms CEOs tend to own less stock and have lesscompensation-based incentives than CEOs in smaller firms. In particular, our all-inclusive estimate of the pay-performance sensitivity for CEOs in firms in the top half of our sample (ranked by market value) is $1.85 per $1,000, compared to $8.05 per $1,000 for CEOs in firms in the bottom half of our sample.We believe that our results are inconsistent with the implications of formal agency models of optimal contracting. The empirical relation between the pay of top-level executives and firm performance, while positive and statistically significant, is small for an occupation in which incentive pay is expected to play an important role. In addition ,our estimates suggest that dismissals are not an important source of managerial incentives since the increases in dismissal probability due to poor performance and the penalties associated with dismissal are both small. Executive inside stock ownership can provide incentives, but these holdings are not generally controlled by the corporate board, and the majority of top executives have small personal stockholdings.Our results are consistent with several alternative hypotheses; CEOs may be unimportant inputs in the production process, for example, or their actions may be easily monitored and evaluated by corporate boards. We offer an additional hypothesis relating to the role of political forces in the contracting process that implicitly regulate executive compensation by constraining the type of contractsthat can be written between management and shareholders. These political forces, operating both in the political sector and within organizations, appear to be important but are difficult to document because they operate in informal and indirect ways. Public disapproval of high rewards seems to have truncated theupper tail of the earnings distribution of corporate executives. Equilibrium in the managerial labor market then prohibits large penalties for poor performance and as a result the dependence of pay on performance is decreased. Our findings that the pay-performance relation, the raw variability of pay changes, and inflation-adjusted pay levels have declined substantially since the 1930s are consistent with such implicit regulation.We define the pay-performance sensitivity, b, as the dollar change i n the CEO’s wealth associate d with a dollar change in the wealth of shareholders. We interpret higher b’s as indicating a closer alignment of interests between the CEO and his shareholders. Suppose, for example, that a CEO is considering a nonproductive b ut costly “pet project” th at he values at $100,000 but that will diminish the value of his firm’s equity by $10million. The CEO will avoid this project if his pay-performance sensitivity exceeds b=.01(through some combination of incentive compensation, options, stock ownership, or probability of being fired for poor stock price performance) but will adopt the project if b< .01.The pay-performance sensitivity is estimated by following all 2,213 CEOs listed in the Executive Compensation Surveys published in Forbes from 1974 to 1986. These surveys include executives serving in 1,295 corporations, for a total of 10,400 CEO-years of data. We match these compensation data to fiscal year corporate performance data obtained from the data files of the Comp stat and the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP). After observations with missing data are eliminated, the final sample contains 7,750 yearly “first differences” in compensation and includes 1,688 executives from 1,049 corporations. Fiscal year stock returns are unavailable for 219 ofthe 7,750observations; calendar-year returns are used in these cases. (Deleting these 219 observations does not affect the results.)1. On average, each $1,000 change in shareholder wealth corresponds to an increase in this year's and next year's salary and bonus of about two cents. The CEO's wealth due to his cash compensation—defined as his total compensation plus the discounted present value of the change in his salary and bonus—changes by about 30￠per $1,000 change in shareholder wealth. In addition, the value of theCEO's stock options—defined as the value of the outstanding stock options plus the gains from exercising options—changes by 15￠per $1,000. Our final upper-bound estimate of the average compensation-related wealth consequences of a $1,000 change in shareholder value is 45￠for the full sample, 40￠for large firms, and 90￠for small firms.2. Our weighted-average estimate of the CEO's dismissal-related wealth consequences of each $1,000 shareholder loss for an average-size firm with — 50 percent net-of-market returns for two consecutive years is 30￠for the full sample, 5￠for large firms, and $2.25 for small firms. Therefore, the total pay-performance sensitivity—including both pay and dismissal—is about 75￠per $1,000 change in shareholder wealth for the full sample (45￠and $3.15 per $1,000 for large and small firms, respectively).3. The largest CEO performance incentives come from ownership of their firms' stock, but such holdings are small and declining. Median 1986 inside stockholdings for 746 CEOs in the Forbes compensation survey are 0.25 percent, and 80 percent of these CEOs hold less than 1.4 percent of their firms' shares.Median ownership for CEOs of large firms is 0.14 percent and for small firms is 0.49 percent. Adding the incentives generated by median CEO stockholdings to our previous estimates gives a total change in all CEO pay- and stock-related wealth of $3.25 per $1,000 change in shareholder wealth for the full sample, $1.85 per $1,000 for large firms, and $8.05 for small firms.4. Boards of directors do not vary the pay-performance sensitivity for CEOs with widely different inside stockholdings.5. Although bonuses represent 50 percent of CEO salary, such bonuses are awarded in ways that are not highly sensitive to performance as measured by changes in market value of equity, accounting earnings, or sales.6. The low variability of changes in CEO compensation reflects the fact that in spite of the apparent importance of bonuses in CEO compensation, they are not very variable from year to year. The frequency distributions of annual percentage changes in CEO salary plus bonus and total pay are comparable to that of a sample of 10,000 randomly selected workers. Thus our results indicating a weak relation between pay and performance are not due to boards of directors using measures of managerial performance that are unobservable to us.7. Median CEO inside stockholdings for the 120 largest NYSE firms fell by an order of magnitude from 0.3 percent in 1938 to 0.03 percent in 1984.8. The average standard deviation of pay changes for CEOs in the top quartile (by value) of all NYSE firms fell from $205,000 in 1934-38 to $127,000 in 1974-86.9. The pay-performance sensitivity for top-quartile CEOs fell by an order of magnitude from 17.5￠per $1,000 in 1934-38 to 1.9￠per $1,000 in 1974-86.10. The average salary plus bonus for top-quartile CEOs (in 1986 dollars) fell from $813,000 in 1934-38 to $645,000 in 1974-86, while the average market value of the sample firms doubled.The lack of strong pay-for-performance incentives for CEOs indicated by our evidence is puzzling. We hypothesize that political forces operating both in the public sector and inside organizations limit large payoffs for exceptional performance. Truncating the upper tail of the payoff distribution requires that the lower tail of the distribution also be truncated in order to maintain levels of compensation consistent with equilibrium in the managerial labor market. The resulting general absence of management incentives in public corporations presents a challenge for social scientists and compensation practitio。

英文文献及翻译1. One of the p ri nciple s: i nce ntives to vary fro m perso n to pe rso n Because o f the differe nt needs of diffe re nt s ta ff, the refo re, the same i nce nti ve effec ts of po lic y inc e nti ves will pla y a differe nt. Eve n wi th a s ta ff, at differe nt ti mes or circ ums ta nces, wi ll ha ve diffe re nt needs. Beca use of i nce nti ves depe ndi ng o n the internal and the s ubjec ti ve fee li ngs of the sta ff a re, there fo re, i nce ntive to va ry from perso n to pers o n.In the fo rmula tio n a nd imp le me ntatio n of i nce nti ve po licies, we must firs t i nves tiga te ea c h e mp lo yee clearly wha t is rea llyreq uired. Req uired to orga ni ze, cla ssify, a nd the n to formulate appropria te policies to he lp mo ti vate e mplo yees to me et these needs.2. Two pri ncip les: app rop riate ince nti vesAppropria te i nce nti ves a nd pe na lties wi ll no t affec t the i nce nti ve effe ct, whi le i nc reasi ng the cos t of i nce ntives. A ward o ve rweig ht emplo yees wo uld ha ve to meet the mood of p ride a nd lost the desire to further e nha nce their o wn; re wa rd ince nti ves too lig ht wi ll no t a c hie ve the effec t, o r s o e mplo yees do not ha ve a se nse of atte ntio n. Hea vy pe na lties a re unfair to make emp lo ye es, o r loss of the comp a ny's ide nti ty, o r e ve n s lo w down o r da mage arisi ngfro m the emo tio ns; le nie nc y erro r will undere stimate theserio us ness o f the sta ff, whic h will prob ably make the sa me mistake.3. The p rinciple of three: fairnessThe fai rness of the ma nage me nt s ta ff are a very importa nt principle, e mp lo yees are a ny unfair trea tme nt wi ll a ffe ct his mood and wo rk e fficienc y, a nd e ffecti ve ness o f the i mpact o f i nce ntives. Emplo ye es to obtai n the sa me sco re, we mus t recei ve the sa me le ve l o f ince nti ve s; the sa me toke n, emp lo ye es c ommitted the same e rror, b ut also s ho uld be s ub jec t to the sa me le ve l o fpunis hme nt. If yo u ca n no t do this, ma nage rs wo uld pre fe r no t to rewa rd or p unis hme nt.Ma nagers dea l wi th emp lo yees a t iss ue, mus t ha ve a fair mi nd, sho uld no t ha ve a ny p rejudices a nd p refe re nce s. Altho ug h so me staff ma y a llow yo u to e njo y, some yo u do not e njo y, b ut at work, must be trea ted eq ually a nd s ho uld not ha ve a ny o f the wo rds a nd acts of i njustice.1. S timulate the tra nsfe r o f sta ff fro m the res ults o f eq ua l to eq ual opportuni ties a nd s trive to crea te a le ve l pla yi ng field.For e xa mp le, Wu S hi ho ng at IB M from a clea n s tart wi th the people, s tep b y step to the sa les c lerk to the district perso n i n cha rge, Ge nera l Ma nage r o f Chi na, wha t a re the reaso ns for this? In addi tion to i ndi vidual effo rts, b ut a lso said tha t IB M s ho uld be a good co rpora te c ulture to a stage o f d e velopme nt, that is,eve ryo ne has unlimited oppo rtuni ties fo r de velop me nt, as lo ng a s there is capacity there will be space fo r the de ve lopme nt ofself-imp le me nta tio n, whic h is to do a lot o f co mpa nies are not, this syste m will undo ub ted ly ins pire a g reat role o f the s taff.2. Inspire the best time to grasp.- Take s aim a t p re-orde r i nce nti ve the mis sion to ad va nceince nti ves.- Ha ve Diffic ulties e mp lo yees, desire to ha ve s tro ng de ma nd, to give the ca re a nd time ly e nco urageme nt.3. Wa nt a fai r a nd acc ura te i nce nti ve, re ward- So und, perfec t pe rforma nce appraisa l s ys tem to e ns ure appropria te assess me nt sc ale, fair a nd re aso nab le.- Ha ve to o ve rco me the re is thi nni ng of the huma n pro-wind.- In re fere nc e sa la ry, p romo tio ns, a wa rds, e tc.评优i nvo lve thevi tal i nte res ts of emp lo yees o n ho t i s s ues i n order to be fai r.4. The imp le me nta tio n of Emp lo yee Sto ck Owners hip P la n.Worke rs a nd e mp lo yees i n o rder to do uble the c apacity o finves tors, mo re co nce rned a bo ut the o utco me of b usi nessoperatio ns a nd imp ro ve the i nitiati ve.Modern huma n reso urces ma nag eme nt e xperie nce a nd re searc h sho ws that emp lo ye es a re involved i n mode rn ma nage me ntreq uire me nts a nd aspira tio ns, a nd c rea te a nd p ro videopportuni ties fo r all emplo yees is to mobi li ze the m to pa rticipa te in the ma nage me nt o f a n e ffecti ve wa y to e nthusiasm. There is no doub t tha t very few peop le participate d i n the disc ussio ns o f the act a nd i ts o wn witho ut i nce nti ves. There fore, to a llow tradeunio ns to participate i n the ma nage me nt o f p rope rly, ca n mo ti vate work ers, b ut a lso the s ucce ss of the e nterp rise to ob tain va luab le kno wledge. Thro ug h participatio n, the fo rmatio n of trade unio nson the e nterprise a s e nse of be lo ngi ng, ide nti ty, se lf-e stee m a nd can further mee t the ne eds o f s elf-rea li zatio n. Se t up a nd impro ve emplo yee p articipatio n i n ma nageme nt, the ra tio nali za tio n of the proposed s ys tem a nd the E mplo yee S tock Owne rs hip a ndstre ng the ni ng leaders hip a t a ll le ve ls a nd the e xc ha nge of communica tio n a nd e nha nce the a ware ne ss o f staff to participate in o wne rs hip.5. Ho no r i nce nti veStaff a ttitude a nd co ntrib ution o f labo r to ho nor rewa rds, s uc h as recog nitio n of the mee ting, iss ued certifica te, ho nor ro ll, i n the compa ny's i nterna l a nd e xte rna l p ublicity o n the media repo rts, ho me visi ts co ndo le nces, vi sit sig htseei ng, co nva lesce nce,trai ni ng o ut o f trai ni ng, ac cess to recomme nd ho nor socie ty, selec ted sta rs mode l, s uc h as clas s.6. Co nce rned abo ut the ince nti vesThe staff co ncerned abo ut work a nd li fe, s uc h as the sta ff se t up the birthda y tab le, birthda y ca rds, ge nera l ma nage r of the iss ue of staff, c are s taff or diffic ult a nd p rese nted a sma ll gi ft s ympathy. 7. Co mpeti ti veThe pro mo tion o f e nte rprise amo ng e mp lo yees, de partme nts compete o n a n eq ua l foo ting be twee n the ord erly a nd the s urvi val of the fi ttes t.8. The mate rial i nce nti vesIncrea se their wages, we lfa re, i ns ura nce, b o nuses, i nce nti veho use s, daily ne cessities, wage s p romo tio n.9. Informatio n i nce ntivesEnterp rises to communica te o fte n, i nformatio n amo ng e mplo yees, the idea of co mmunica tio n, i nfo rma tio n s uc h as co nfere nc es, field relea se, e nterp rises repo rte d that the repo rti ng s ys tem, the associatio n ma nage r to re cei ve the s ys tem da te.附录二：翻译1. 原则之一：激励要因人而异由于不同员工的需求不同，所以，相同的激励政策起到的激励效果也会不尽相同。