Pay for Performance in the Public Sector—Benefits and (Hidden) Costs

Current reforms in the public sector are characterized by the introduction of businesslike incentive structures, in particular the introduction of "pay for performance” schemes in public institutions. However, the public sector has some specific characteristics, which might restrict the naive adoption of pay for performance. Our article analyzes whether the impact of pay for performance on performance is bound to conditions, and if this is the case, under which conditions pay for performance has a positive or a negative effect on performance. We explore this contingency in a meta-analytic review of previous experimental studies on the effects of pay for performance on performance. We further show why pay for performance sometimes negatively affects personal efforts. With an experimental vignette study we demonstrate (a) that motivation is likely to be a key influence on the effect of performance-related pay on performance, and (b) that pay for performance is generally more costly as it appears because it almost always produces hidden costs of rewards. Our findings help to explain the modest success of pay for performance in the public secto

Unleashing Employee-Employer Trust: The Uncharted Influence of Responsible Leadership in Technology-Permeated Workplaces

Despite significant interest in employee-employer trust, our current understanding of this phenomenon remains limited. Therefore, this study aims to understand variations in the quality of employee-employer trust within technology-permeated workplaces. We conducted semi-structured interviews with employees (n=15) from two trust cases (calculative vs. identity-based) in technology-permeated workplaces and identified leadership responsibility, employer communication, and organizational culture as critical factors shaping the trust relationships. Our findings reveal that leaders in the identity-based trust case communicate employers\u27 values and purpose during technology deployment more effectively compared to the calculative trust case. Additionally, the responsibility orientation of leaders emerged as a pivotal factor influencing the quality of employee trust. Our data suggests that a stakeholder-oriented approach to responsibility strengthens trust in technology-permeated workplaces, while prioritizing an instrumental responsibility orientation undermines it. We contribute to trust and responsible leadership theory by providing valuable guidance for cultivating employee trust in technology-driven workplaces

Exploring the Chemistry of Datafication Control – Pathways for a Trust-Enabling Use of Smart Workplace Technology

Organizations experiment with how smarttechnology can be used to manage employees since before COVID-19 and the possibilities seem almost limitless. However, the question of how this can be achieved without impairing the so-needed trust inside organizations is yet to answer. Hence, in this study, we employ a crisp-set QCA to investigate what trustenabling datafication control configurations look like. Drawing on unique survey data from Switzerland, we show that datafication control can go hand in hand with trust if organizations make efforts for employeecentricity. Further, we can reveal four distinct ways of how organizations can implement employee-centricity to mitigate possible trust-impairing signals that stem from augmented data-gathering and analysis capabilities. Our results contribute to the still heated debate on the duality of control and trust. They also help leaders to navigate through the unmanageable multitude of possible and even trust-toxic combinations

Unleashing Employee-Employer Trust:The Uncharted Influence of Responsible Leadership in Technology-Permeated Workplaces

Despite significant interest in employee-employer trust, our current understanding of this phenomenon remains limited. Therefore, this study examines variations of employees' perceptions of their employer's trustworthiness within technology-permeated workplaces. We conducted semi-structured interviews with employees (n=15) from two trust cases (calculative vs. identity-based) in technology-permeated workplaces and identified leadership responsibility, employer communication, and organizational culture as critical factors shaping the trust relationships. Our findings reveal that leaders in the identity trust case communicate employers' values and purpose during technology deployment more effectively compared to the calculative trust case. Additionally, the responsibility orientation of leaders emerged as a pivotal factor influencing the quality of employee trust. Our data suggests that a stakeholder-oriented approach to responsibility strengthens trust in technology-permeated workplaces, while prioritizing an instrumental responsibility orientation undermines it. We contribute to trust and responsible leadership theory by providing valuable guidance for cultivating employee trust in technology-permeated workplaces.</p

Smart Tech is all Around us – Bridging Employee Vulnerability with Organizational Active Trust-Building

Public and academic opinion remains divided regarding the benefits and pitfalls of datafication technology in organizations, particularly regarding their impact on employees. Taking a dual-process perspective on trust, we propose that datafication technology can create small, erratic surprises in the workplace that highlight employee vulnerability and increase employees’ reliance on the systematic processing of trust. We argue that these surprises precipitate a phase in the employment relationship in which employees more actively weigh trust-related cues, and the employer should therefore engage in active trust management to protect and strengthen the relationship. Our paper develops a framework of symbolic and substantive strategies to guide organizations’ active trust management efforts to (re-)create situational normality, root goodwill intentions, and enable a more balanced interdependence between the organization and its employees. We discuss the implications of our paper for reconciling competing narratives about the future of work and for developing an understanding of trust processes.</p

The Role of Organizational Control Systems in Employees’ Organizational Trust and Performance Outcomes

This study examined how organizational control is related to employees’ organizational trust. We specifically focus on how different forms of control (process, outcome, and normative) relate to employees’ trust in their employing organizations and examine whether such trust in turn relates positively to employee job performance (task performance and organizational citizenship behavior). In addition, and in response to the recommendations of past research, we examined these relationships in a high control and compliance-based cultural context. Using data from 105 employee–supervisor dyads from professional services firms in Singapore, we find support for our hypothesized model. The implications of the results for theory and practice, and directions for future research, are discussed.Economics of Technology and Innovatio

Good organizational design for bad motivational dispositions?

Wechselseitige Unterstützung – die Essenz von Teamzusammenarbeit – ist zu einem Grossteil intrinsisch motiviert. Wie können Organisationen diese intrinische Motivation gezielt beeinflussen? Verschiedene Forschungsansätze geben unterschiedliche Antworten: Der situationale Ansatz empfiehlt eine entsprechende Organisationsgestaltung. Der individualistische Ansatz stützt sich auf die Auswahl geeigneter Mitarbeiter. Wir verfolgen einen interaktionistischen Ansatz, der bislang nur selten zur Erklärung für die wechselseitige Unterstützung in Unternehmen genutzt wurde. Letzterer kombiniert die Organisationsgestaltung mit der Auswahl geeigneter Personen. Wir stützen uns auf die Theorie der Selbstbestimmung, um Wechselwirkungen zwischen persönlichen Prädispositionen und Organisationsgestaltung zu erklären. Wir testen diese Hypothesen mit Hilfe einer Vignettenstudie. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Organisationsgestaltung der wichtigste Erklärungsfaktor für wechselseitige Unterstützung in Unternehmen ist. Allerdings verändern persönliche Prädispositionen die Wahrnehmung von Personen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass eine entsprechende Organisationsgestaltung auch Personen mit weniger vorteilhaften Prädispositionen zur wechselseitigen Unterstützung motivieren kann. Helping and sharing behaviors – the essence of team work and organizational success – are to a great part intrinsically motivated. How can organizations influence intrinsic motivation in a predictable way? Different research approaches give different answers: The situationist approach suggests designing a good organizational context. The individual difference approach concentrates on the selection of employees with good motivational dispositions. We follow an interactionist approach which has been rarely applied in the field of helping and sharing behaviors. It combines organizational design with personnel selection. We draw on selfdetermination theory to specify the determinants of interaction between organizational design and motivational dispositions. Our propositions are tested with a vignette study. The results show that the organizational context is the strongest predictor of helping and sharing behaviors. Nevertheless, motivational dispositions play an important role by acting as perceptual filters. In a good organizational setting even individuals with a «bad motivational disposition» can be motivated to cooperate in a good-spirited way