Employees expect companies to stick to certain standards that represent fairness (Compensation Dilemmas: An Exercise In Ethical Decision-Making 1995). Early efforts of economic views have studied compensation systems over the years. The all-encompassing view at the time was that the best possible compensation systems met the fair days wage for a fair days work criteria. The key for managers and others who design pay systems Is to ensure that pay accurately reflected the economic value added to the firm by a worker.
This is where fairness is expressed only in economic terms. Since thattime managementscholars have developed a much richer understanding of what fairness means to employees and how views of fairness affect their attitudes and behaviors. Compensation systems also play Important social and representational roles in organizations and through these roles pay systems affect a variety of Important outcomes such as the nature of employee commitment and performance and work relationships.
Given the essential role that compensation systems play in employment relationships, it is also very likely hat they play an important role in shaping whether people feel they are treated withrespect, trust, and dignity and whether they believe the values and customs of the organization are worthy of their fullest commitment and highest efforts (Bloom, M. 2004). Could executive compensation be redefined by performance management? ” When no performance measures are defined and documented for company executives, this places noaccountabilityon the CEO to produce measurable results.
On the other hand, if performance measures are defined, documented and accountability is laced on the CEO and is tied to compensation this could prove to be beneficial for all involved. While employees are paid based on established Job classification systems, Coo’s however arbitrarily negotiate salaries where there Is no cap, but benefactor. The company is injured by way of a harmful image in the eyes of the industry. The consumers of the company’s products or services are also hurt. The company may also experience retention problems and stockholders may suffer from financial loss.
Also employees are left to deal with disappointment, bitterness and owe morale (Carter, C. 2009). Americans are fuming right now. Pummel by the bind of a painful recession and furious over oversized executive compensation packages at the very Wall Street firms widely blamed for the economic chaos, they gradually distrust key establishments and individual leaders. Americans are angered at the financial services region. They believe that these institutions have rigged the game so that top level executives are rewarded substantially even when they fail. Americans want action to restore fairness to the system and get pay back in line.
The variety of experts and activists of political leaders and ordinary citizens, there is a belief that executive incentives have exaggerated short-term performance, supported unnecessary risk-taking, and failed to discipline poor performance. Many believe that incentive plans have tempted some Coos to put personal financial interests in front of good stewardship that provides the long-term interests of their organizations (Ethics Resource Center, 2010). In recent years it has become common for corporate board of directors to recruit a star chief executive officer with an executive severance cage.
The severance agreement becomes part of a contractual commitment that is often unrelated to the circumstances of the executive’s eventual firing. To complicate matters, severance is often structured as deferred compensation for an executive’s earlier successes, before things would eventually fall apart. When a CEO is discredited they always argue that they were not overpaid at termination because the rise in share price they achieved for stockholders during their tenure with the company. Companies should not make severance commitments when hiring executives.
This will come back to haunt them. This style could make it difficult for firms trying to hire top talent. A CEO with ethics would be embarrassed when receiving an abundant severance after their decisions caused severe anguish to the employees and shareholders (Kipling, K. 2008). Addressing specific errors in compensation plans is critical and identifying the best metrics for measuring performance is part of the answer. Maybe creating an ethical organization is a critical first step that sets the stage for effective compensation plans.
Ethical performance should be one of the metrics for determining compel; sensation. Many of the problems credited to failed compensation plans are really about ethical slip ups. I’m not saying that executives intentionally engage in bad conduct. But it can mean that a lack of continuous focus on ethics can induce bad behavior. This behavior can turn into rationalizing decisions without truly centering on the allegations for the long-term well-being of the customers, its employees, shareholders and the company as a whole (Ethics Resource Center, 2010).
Executive compensation is not illegal. However the actions of some Coo’s and executives can be ethically questionable. From the viewpoint of economic effectiveness, restructuring or even downsizing may be required in order to arrive at specific businessgoals. Although, making the decision to eliminate Jobs while the CEO is overly compensated for providing inadequate performance is not only feeble make a incredible impact by educating board of directors on accountability in executive packages, compensation and incorporating strategic performance management initiativ