Executive Style

Incentives at work: who gets what and what really works

Stephanie Gardiner, Glenda Kwek and Alicia Wood
October 11, 2011

Video will begin in 5 seconds.

Video settings

What type of connection do you have?

Video settings form
  1. Note: A cookie will be set to keep your preferences.

Video settings

Your video format settings have been saved.

Would a bonus make you work harder?

The SMH Online asked Sydneysiders if bonus pay would make them work harder.

"I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!"

That outraged sentiment - expressed by Australian actor Peter Finch in the 1976 film Network - is getting renewed oxygen as reaction builds to the extraordinary bonuses top executives pay themselves while other staff barely rate cost-of-living increases.

What motivates employees? It's not always money.

What motivates employees? It's not always money.

In America, the Occupy Wall Street movement and We are the 99 Per Cent are outgunning the Tea Party as protests over corporate greed spread around the nation.

There is even a move to launch similar protests in Australia.

So how do incentives work - both at the top of companies and lower down the ladder?

Does an extra million really motivate a chief executive who is already making many millions to work harder? And, if so, why is the CEO not giving of their best when they are being paid so much already?

In the lower ranks, does a cash bonus work better than other reward schemes? Or is the challenge of the work and the respect of peers and employer more important?

The expert view

The experts say that money won't buy loyalty nor happiness from an employee.

Anthony Grant, the director of the coaching psychology unit at the University of Sydney, said that, while a level of financial security was necessary, wads of cash would not encourage employees to work harder or faster.

"Once a household has an income of $100,000 a year, money is not a key motivator," Dr Grant said.

Instead, money was considered a "hygenic" factor.

Dr Grant explained it was just one of many "things that do not give positive satisfaction but if you don't have them it makes people dissatisfied".

Dr Grant said that keeping an employee happy had more to do with ensuring a person has proper resources, respect, and that their mental health is considered.

"If they don't have the resources to do their job well, not just adequately, this will not just demotivate people, it will really piss them off," Dr Grant said.

"What works in the long term is feeling like you are part of a team, feeling recognised - that you are not a machine, and feeling that you are making a difference in the world."

Making someone feel recognised could be as easy as "providing lunch at a meeting", said Keri Spooner who runs the postgraduate program in Human Resources management at the University of Technology, Sydney.

She warned that the biggest mistake employers made when handing out incentives was that they did not consider what behaviour it encouraged.

"They have to be very carefully aligned with what you are trying to achieve," Dr Spooner said.

She gave the example that a person, who was paid a bonus for selling more of a product, would spend less time finding out what product was best for a customer.

Dr Spooner also rejected the idea that cash incentives made people work harder.

"Money does not buy loyalty and it doesn't buy commitment. It is such a common commodity that if that is all that is keeping you in a job - all someone has to do is offer you more and you're gone," she said.

Her research into the work practices of local government managers showed commitment came from an employee's self-esteem.

"We thought it would be a commitment to their local community or to a local politician, but it was a commitment to professional values that motivated them. They wanted to do their job well, because it was tied up with their identity," she said.

The rich entrepreneur's view

Australian entrepreneur Dick Smith, who founded Dick Smith Electronics, Dick Smith Foods and Australian Geographic, said he had a range of incentives for his staff.

These included giving staff a percentage of profits and Christmas bonuses.

But he said job satisfaction was key, however much people earned.

"It's a combination," he said.

"Job satisfaction doesn't just come from money. It's feeling that you've done something useful. Human self-esteem is incredibly important. I think that, at the end of the week if you believe you've done something worthwhile, that's far more important than just money."

Mr Smith said he felt pitting staff against each other for financial or other incentives was counterproductive as good job performances in some positions were hard to quantify.

"I like the idea of having a bonus which is spread among all of the staff. I really believe it's quite unfair to pay some people a bonus and other people who are just as valuable in the company don't get one."

He said that, while he paid his executives well, he never paid them millions of dollars in salaries.

"The key to what I'm saying is that you have to spread the wealth around. What's happening now is great concentrations of wealth.

"The wealth is so high at the top and pensioners are getting $16,000 [a year] at the moment. The problem is capitalism needs trust between the bosses and the workers. That trust goes when you pay people huge amounts of money."

He said today's executive pay incentives had become so large they were ineffective and not linked to risk-taking.

"Normally you make large amounts of money when you've taken large risks. People who get paid large amounts of money have invested their house, their whole lives in it. But, these days, they take no risks and if the whole company goes down, the history is that they are given even more money to leave."

But Mr Smith said the wage gap between the lowest and highest-paid workers was becoming so entrenched it was unlikely to narrow.

"It's part of globalisation; there's nothing you can do about it. For 50 years, we've had capitalism where the chief executive got three or four times what the workers got. Now they get 300 times.

"The whole thing is utterly ridiculous. It's all about greed, but I suppose that's what capitalism is about."

The view from the street

Looking around Sydney's Martin Place, bustling with men and women in suits carrying paperwork and yakking into their mobile phones, you might assume these workers epitomise an industry ruled by big bonuses.

But many out on their breaks or walking to meetings this morning said respect in the workplace, extra career opportunities and social activities were more important incentives to work hard.

"I think it's the quality of the work and the person you work for and what you are learning that really drives you; not necessarily pay," said Ingrid Radford, 53, who works in finance.

"I think respect of the organisation and what it does for the community is very important."

Interior designer Cintia Mistro, 33, said loving her job was where her motivation came from.

"It's not the money itself," she said.

"So I don't think getting more money for it would make me work harder."

She said other incentives to work hard would be a good work environment.

"If I feel like I've been respected and recognised [for] what I do, these are the main ones for me."

Brad Fry, a 22-year-old chef, said good pay was important in any job, but respect from customers was also an incentive.

"Just more appreciation for the job you do from the people who are requesting your services. That does help a lot, I think," Mr Fry said.

"More community things, like your workplace will get together and do events and share things together, like barbecues."

Claire Cook, 22, said bonuses were important to her.

"It gives you motivation. I work in sales so bonuses come as part of the job," Ms Cook said.

She said other possible incentives would include holidays: "The opportunity to travel, without a doubt."

Others said bonuses helped them figure out what their goals were and how they could achieve them.

"It gives you the particular thing you need to achieve in order to get remunerated," said Scott Buckingham, 30, who works in financial services.

"It definitely drives behaviour."

Mr Buckingham said career advancement would be another important incentive.

"Just wanting to feel like there's a benefit to you for hard work."

Chris Glen, 35, who works in media and marketing, said a bonus provided something tangible to work towards.

"I actually think if you don't have a bonus then you get nothing to work towards to fulfil the objectives in your job," he said.

Inderpal Singh, a 57-year-old contractor in the finance sector, said bonuses were definitely a way to make him work harder, but achieving goals was also motivating.

"It depends on the challenge, you know, if you have something to do, a project or something like that.

"A challenge definitely makes you work harder."

Poll: What is the best incentive at work for you?

Poll form
  1. Please select an answer.
  2. View results
Fair pay and conditions

36%

Cash bonus on top of base pay

22%

Reward scheme

4%

Peers

3%

Boss

4%

Respect for organisation

7%

Self-esteem

9%

Social activities

1%

Time off

14%

Total votes: 2324.

Would you like to vote?

You will need Cookies enabled to use our Voting Feature.

Poll closed 13 Oct, 2011

Disclaimer:

These polls are not scientific and reflect the opinion only of visitors who have chosen to participate.

29 comments

  • I left a job during the original 'GFC' when the company said there was no money for pay rises...I took this on face value and accepted it. Then I found out that my boss' boss received a bonus worth more than my annual salary! All this when my team saved the company $500K in six months! This is a well known and often applauded Australian company...I handed my resignation in the next day and from what I've heard there is a revolving door there to this day. Oh well, its all about the share price isn't it?

    Commenter
    Funny
    Location
    Sidni
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 2:48PM
  • I don't need rewards or incentives, I bathe in the satisfaction of knowing that all those late nights and weekends away from my family has probably allowed some poor foreign CEO to add another much needed Astin Martin to his garage. Bless us. Every one.

    Commenter
    aza
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 3:06PM
  • I saw how the bonus schemes worked under the Howard governments AWAs. Bonuses more often than not went to do nothing toadies who brown nosed but produced little. I watched as hard working and productive people were denied bonuses whilst sly and unproductive ones seemed to reap benefits. I was rather shocked to see certain unproductive team leaders receive high bonuses whilst there teams received little or nothing. My observations were that the system in place lacked any transparency or fairness and even were there any such transparency since there was a set amount to be paid as bonuses it meant that if everyone doubled their production the bonuses to be shared would be smaller. It also meant that certain people who were bonus driven would cease to work as team players to ensure that there own nest only was well feathered. The system well supported those who were self serving but did not in any way assist those who really did their job.

    Commenter
    David
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 3:07PM
  • Having worked for companies that gave me plenty of money but the where the roles ended badly, I can safely say that chasing the dollar is not the be all and end all of a working career. Respect for your work ethic, knowledge and role are more important. having said that it is also important that with the recognition comes the money rather than that beng taken by others. If somebody else gets the pay rise from your hard work it becomes very demoralising and you don't stay in those roles for long
    Skee

    Commenter
    Skee
    Location
    Lane Cove
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 3:27PM
  • the problem is the American model of capitlaism. It encourages unrestricted greed, and the people at the top of society/ corporations have more opportunity to exploit that encouragement. Some Northern European countries have different models of capitalism/ free market economies where there are legislated restrictions on greed, based on a social contract/ ethics.
    Why not legislate that the overall benefit to anyone in an organisation can be no more than, say, 20 times the overall REAL benefit to the lowest paid employee, including contractors, sub-contractors, and out-workers?
    If the CEO wants a pay rise, he can have it. But only if everyone else receives a similar benefit.
    There was a US/canadian doco screened on SBS some time ago about deaths at work in heavy industry, focussing on the steel industry in the US. One of the major US steel corporations had been bequeathed to it's employees by the original owner decades before, because he had no children.
    When you start work there, you get a wage plus a shareholding in the company because now you're an owner.
    This flies in the face of the very concept of US capitalism, yet..
    This Co. has the best safety record in the US industry, the greatest overall financial benefits to the employees, and is one of the most profitable US steel corporations.
    But, of course, both political parties in Australia are the financial hostages of Big Business so there is no way they would have the balls or the vision to implement such changes here.

    Commenter
    Itoldyouso
    Location
    suburbia
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 3:28PM
  • It's not just at the executive levels, money going to the wrong people in the wrong quantities occur in all facets where bonuses are rewarded. The question that's often asked of those whom are in relative positions of privilege and power is, "how much is enough?" Ask a CEO whose earnings are in the millions and you'll never get a straight answer. More often than not, depending which Republican you approach, you'll get a reply akin to 'who are you to tell me what's enough?'

    Commenter
    lm
    Location
    Sydney CBD
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 3:40PM
  • JOB | Sydney - October 11, 2011, 3:04PM

    "Top executives should be paid on results..."

    That's all well and good, but they should be personally liable if the company makes a loss.

    Otherwise executives have a "heads I win, tails you lose" arrangement don't they?

    Commenter
    SuperTrump
    Location
    Sydney
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 3:38PM
  • Yes! Occupy is coming to australia this weekend. look it up. This is a world wide movement.
    Australians are constantly Complacent to problems. In fact we're now known for it... Yes our overall lifestyle is better than anyone else in the world but we achieve that by goose stepping along with Corporations all the way. The effect of the current status quo is going to effect our children and grand children. Act now to change australia for the better before we are in America's situation.

    Our ratio of income to a Corporate CEO is a worse than a serf the middle ages.
    We lay back and let our government send troops to every half baked war that pops up... We can't say no to a mining company drilling for gas on our own land. That's just a few of the problems of corporate greed in Australia. Mining companies earn 99% percent of the wealth in Australia grinding tonnes of coal and iron ore across our roads and train lines with barely any contribution to our Sovereign wealth... Profits straight over seas. Yeah 150000 jobs but what ratio is that to Australias population. Once it's gone it's gone and if they ruin the water table in the process were really f*****.

    Time to take a stand... This is the point of Occupy. This is an all encompassing protest against the greed of a few effecting the lives of the many.

    Commenter
    Al
    Location
    Bondi
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 4:04PM
  • The company where I work decided to give all employees a flat 3% pay rise this year - the first in 3 years - regardless of performance. The message management have provided is that it doesn't matter how hard you work, you'll still get the same pay rise as everyone else.

    Mind you, this is also a company that during the GFC made a verbal agreement with staff that we'd take a mandatory 1 day off a fortnight in exchange for a 10% paycut. Later they decided to cut out the 1 day off without consulting staff (and threatened anyone who wanted to continue taking the time off) and wondered why we had 50% turn over as soon as the employment market picked up again.

    Commenter
    RobbyM
    Location
    Sydney
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 4:19PM
  • Waste of time being on an incentive program as it is up to your Manager who decides what you get, regardless of how well you have performed. So why bother??

    Commenter
    Brian
    Location
    Brisbane
    Date and time
    October 11, 2011, 4:24PM

More comments

Comments are now closed

More Related Coverage

The impact of high pay

11 Oct A former CEO laments that paying executives can have a negative effect on performance.