Responsible Rewarding Systems - the First Step to Explore the Research Area

• Autorzy: Katarzyna Klimkiewicz , Ewa Beck-Krala

Warianty tytułu

Odpowiedzialne wynagradzanie - pierwsze kroki w kierunku określenia obszaru badań

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This article deals with the question how to shape a compensation system which will promote socially responsible behaviors towards both internal and external stakeholders. Internal stakeholders are understood as shareholders, managers, employees, whereas external stakeholders are perceived especially as customers and suppliers. As the problem seems to be complex, there is a need for a multilevel analysis that will concentrate on the intra-organizational relations between managers and employees' obligations to achieving organizational goals. It is also important to examine the impact of a compensation system, performance standards and assessment criteria on the fulfillment of external stakeholders' expectations for the value provided by a company. We face two perspectives on the process of rewarding employees: from HRM (human resources management) and CSR (corporate social responsibility) view. The first one concentrates on the policies, procedures and effective practices due to high performance results, whereas the second on stakeholder's expectations, ethical behavior and sustainability of outcomes. Both CSR as well as HRM stress the importance of the integrity between employee's needs and organizational goals. Therefore, we extend the view by analyzing the instruments that are components of the total reward due to the impact they might have on the fulfillment of shareholders' and stakeholders' expectations for organizational outcomes(original abstract)

Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu dotyczy wielu aspektów funkcjonowania organizacji. Jednym z nich jest wynagradzanie pracowników i tworzenie wspierającego środowiska pracy. Celem artykułu jest wskazanie konieczności odpowiedzialnego kształtowania systemów wynagrodzeń oraz takiego kształtowania systemu wynagrodzeń, które przyniesie wymierne korzyści wszystkim interesariuszom organizacji. Analizuje się więc system wynagrodzeń z perspektywy CSR, promującego społecznie odpowiedzialne zachowania interesariuszy firmy, jak również z perspektywy ZZL, wspierającej realizację jej celów. Zrównoważona i odpowiedzialna polityka wynagradzania przynosi korzyści w dłuższej perspektywie czasu. Na bazie analizy poszczególnych składników całkowitego pakietu wynagrodzeń autorki wskazują na pewne zagrożenia, jakie niesie ze sobą nieprzemyślana, niespójna lub zbyt agresywna polityka wynagradzania pracowników(abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Social Responsibility; Enterprises

PL

Społeczna odpowiedzialność; Przedsiębiorstwo

• Czasopismo: Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
• Rocznik: 2015
• Numer: nr 387 Social Responsibility of Organizations Directions of Changes
• Strony: 66--79

Twórcy

autor

Katarzyna Klimkiewicz

• AGH University of Science and Technology Kraków, Poland

autor

Ewa Beck-Krala

• AGH University of Science and Technology Kraków, Poland

Bibliografia

• Armstrong M., 2010, Armstrong's Essential Human Resource Management Practice, Kogan Page Publisher.
• Armstrong M., Brown D., Reilly P., 2011, Increasing the effectiveness of reward management: An evidence based approach, Employee Relations, vol. 33, no. 2.
• Artz B., 2008, The role of firm size and performance pay in determining employee job satisfaction, Labor, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 315-343.
• Basu K., Palazzo G., 2008, Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking, Academy of Management Review, vol. 33, no. 1.
• Bąk M. (ed.), 2007, Standard "Zatrudnienie Fair Play". Odpowiedzialne zarządzanie zasobami ludzkimi, Zatrudnienie Fair Play, Warszawa.
• Beck-Krala E., Scott D., 2014, Research Design for Compensation Systems Evaluation, [in:] 4th European Reward Management Conference (RMC 2013): Brussels, December 2-3, 2013, European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management.
• Brown D., 2008, Measuring the effectiveness of pay and rewards: The Achilles' heel of contemporary reward professionals, Compensation and Benefits Review, vol. 40, no. 5.
• Cai Y., Jo H., Pan C., 2011, Vice or Virtue?, Springer Science & Business Media B.V., pp. 159-173.
• Callan S.J., Thomas J.M., 2011, Executive compensation, corporate social responsibility, and corporate financial performance, Corporate Social Responsibility & Environmental Management, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 332-351.
• Faleye O., Trahan E., 2011, Labor-friendly corporate practices: Is what is good for employees good for shareholders?, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 1-27.
• Green C., Heywood J.S., 2008, Does performance pay increase job satisfaction?, Economica, vol. 75, pp. 710-728.
• Gruys M.L., Sackett P.R., 2003, Investing the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior, International Journal of Selection &Assessment, vol. 11(1), pp. 1-42.
• Jensen M., Meckling W., 1976, Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure, Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 3, pp. 305-360.
• Johnson R., Greening D., 1999, The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 564-578.
• Kane E.J., 2002, Using deferred compensation to strengthen the ethics of financial regulation, Journal of Banking & Finance, no. 26, pp. 1919-1933.
• Kolk A., Perego P., 2014, Sustainable bonuses: Sign of corporate responsibility or window dressing?, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 1-15.
• Kozioł L. (ed.), 1997, Doskonalenie systemu wynagradzania w przedsiębiorstwie, AE, Kraków Madsen P.M., Bingham J.B., 2014, A stakeholder-human capital perspective on the link between social performance and executive compensation, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1-30.
• Mahoney L., Thorn L., 2006, An examination of the structure of executive compensation and corporate social responsibility: A Canadian investigation, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 149-162.
• McWilliams A., Siegel D.S., Wright P.M., 2006, Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 43, no. 1.
• OECD, Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/56/36/1922428.pdf.
• Pandher G., Currie R., 2013, CEO compensation: A resource advantage and stakeholder-bargaining perspective, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 22-41.
• Porter T., Miles P., 2013, CSR longevity: Evidence from long-term practices in large corporations, Corporate Reputation Review, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 313-340.
• Rekker S., Benson K.L., Faff R.W., 2014, Corporate social responsibility and CEO compensation revisited, Journal of Economics & Business, vol. 72, pp. 84-103.
• Robinson S.L., Bennett R.J., 1995, A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 38(2), pp. 555-572.
• Rojek-Nowosielska M., Szczepaniak J., 2003, Odpowiedzialność społeczna przedsiębiorstwa a teorie agencji i interesariuszy, Prace Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej we Wrocławiu "Nauki Humanistyczne," AE we Wrocławiu, Wrocław.
• Scott D., McMullen T., Sperling R., 2006, Evaluating pay program effectiveness: A national survey of compensation professionals, WorldatWork Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 47-53.
• Shankman N.A., 1999, Reframing the debate between agency and stakeholder theories of the firm, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 9.
• Smith M., 2013, Building the business case for investing in employees, Compensation & Benefits Review, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 327-333.
• Spector P., Fox S., Domagalski T., 2006, Emotions, violence and counterproductive work behavior,[in:] Kelloway E., Barling J., Hurrell J. (eds.), Handbook of Workplace Violence, Sage Publications, pp. 29-47.
• Tseng Lu-Ming, Yue-Min Kang, 2014, The influences of sales compensations, management stringency and ethical evaluations on product recommendations made by insurance brokers, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, vol. 22 , no. 1, pp. 26-42.
• Wood D., 1991, Corporate social performance revisited, Academy of Management Review, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 691-718.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15611/pn.2015.387.06