Determinants and effects of subjectivity in incentives

被引:257
作者
Gibbs, M [1 ]
Merchant, KA
Van der Stede, WA
Vargus, ME
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[2] Univ So Calif, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
[3] Univ Texas Dallas, Dallas, TX 75230 USA
关键词
incentive compensation; discretionary bonus; subjective performance evaluation; performance; pay satisfaction;
D O I
10.2308/accr.2004.79.2.409
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
This study examines two questions: When do firms make greater use of subjectivity in awarding bonuses? What are the effects of subjectivity on employee pay satisfaction and firm performance? We examine these questions using data from a sample of 526 department managers in 250 car dealerships. First, the findings suggest that subjective bonuses are used to complement perceived weaknesses in quantitative performance measures and to provide employees insurance against downside risk in their pay. Specifically, use of subjective bonuses is positively related to: (1) the extent of long-term investments in intangibles; (2) the extent of organizational interdependencies; (3) the extent to which the achievability of the formula bonus target is both difficult and leads to significant consequences if not met; and (4) the presence of an operating loss. Second, we find that the effects of subjective bonuses on pay satisfaction, productivity, and profitability are larger the greater the manager's tenure, consistent with the idea that subjectivity improves incentive contracting when there is greater trust between the subordinate and supervisor.
引用
收藏
页码:409 / 436
页数:28
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]  
BAIMAN S, 1995, ACCOUNT REV, V70, P557
[2]   SUBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE-MEASURES IN OPTIMAL INCENTIVE CONTRACTS [J].
BAKER, G ;
GIBBONS, R ;
MURPHY, KJ .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1994, 109 (04) :1125-1156
[3]   INCENTIVE CONTRACTS AND PERFORMANCE-MEASUREMENT [J].
BAKER, GP .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1992, 100 (03) :598-614
[4]   COMPENSATION AND INCENTIVES - PRACTICE VS THEORY [J].
BAKER, GP ;
JENSEN, MC ;
MURPHY, KJ .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 1988, 43 (03) :593-616
[5]   SENSITIVITY, PRECISION, AND LINEAR AGGREGATION OF SIGNALS FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION [J].
BANKER, RD ;
DATAR, SM .
JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 1989, 27 (01) :21-39
[6]   ON THE INTERCHANGEABILITY OF OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE MEASURES OF EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE - A METAANALYSIS [J].
BOMMER, WH ;
JOHNSON, JL ;
RICH, GA ;
PODSAKOFF, PM ;
MACKENZIE, SB .
PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 1995, 48 (03) :587-605
[7]   CEO compensation: The role of individual performance evaluation [J].
Bushman, RM ;
Indjejikian, RJ ;
Smith, A .
JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING & ECONOMICS, 1996, 21 (02) :161-193
[8]  
FELTHAM GA, 1994, ACCOUNT REV, V69, P429
[9]  
FOLGER R, 1989, ACAD MANAGE J, V32, P115, DOI 10.5465/256422
[10]   TRUST-IN-SUPERVISOR AND PERCEIVED FAIRNESS AND ACCURACY OF PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS [J].
FULK, J ;
BRIEF, AP ;
BARR, SH .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH, 1985, 13 (04) :301-313