Can You Pay for Quality Work? A Government Case Study

This article presents some recent developments in team performance pay using a complexity framework. It challenges W. Edwards Deming's traditional view on performance pay, which is that it takes the focus off the process and encourages competition instead of cooperation. In the past, wage payment and quality management systems were perceived as simple and discrete. As quality organizations were encouraged to develop teamwork and cooperation, most continued the old system of paying for individuals. An Australian qualitative case study is reported, which shows both improved corporate performance and greater stakeholder quality alignment. “Quality pay” was used as the transforming methodology. The qualitative data confirmed employees increasingly sharing the management s strategic intent to achieve quality and teamwork. The quantitative data showed that quality pay led to more than expected improvements in customer satisfaction, employee wellness, and business processes. The ethnographic and grounded research approach using NUD*IST™ as the text management provided rich authentic examples of the findings in the Australian organization's stakeholders' own words. The novel quality pay assessment method using quality-trained peers gave employees confidence in the new system and helped build quality alignment. The new synergy of wage and quality systems provides valuable insights for quality researchers and practitioners.

[1]  R. Stacey The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes , 1995 .

[2]  John Halligan Senior Executive Pay Policies in the Australian Public Servi , 1994 .

[3]  Elizabeth J. Hawk,et al.  Realizing the Potential of Teams Through Team-Based Rewards , 1994 .

[4]  Alma Whiteley Grounded research: A modified grounded theory for the business setting , 2004 .

[5]  S. T. Foster,et al.  The Role of Quality Tools in Improving Satisfaction with Government , 2002 .

[6]  Analyzing the Comparative Pay-for-Performance Experience: Are There Common Lessons? , 1993 .

[7]  F. W. Derrick,et al.  Survey shows employees at different levels in an organization define quality differently , 1989 .

[8]  T. Jick Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. , 1979 .

[9]  A. Whiteley,et al.  Information for decision making in marketing: the use of Group Support Systems (GSS) , 1996 .

[10]  J. Belcher Gainsharing and Variable Pay , 1994 .

[11]  Dooyoung Shin,et al.  Critical Implementation Issues in Total Quality Management , 1998 .

[12]  L. Thevenot,et al.  Organized Complexity , 2001 .

[13]  B. F. Yavas,et al.  A Comparative Study of Attitudes of U.S. and Asian Managers Toward Product Quality , 1994 .

[14]  Edward E. Lawler,et al.  Strategic Pay: Aligning Organizational Strategies and Pay Systems. , 1991 .

[15]  Gregory F. Gruska W. E. Deming in the new millennium , 2000 .

[16]  K. Eisenhardt Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[17]  Michelle Brown Performance Pay Choices: Evidence From Certified Agreements , 1997 .

[18]  J. Kallinikos Organized Complexity: Posthumanist Remarks on the Technologizing of Intelligence , 1998 .

[19]  David F. Larcker,et al.  Total Quality Management and the Choice of Information and Reward Systems , 1995 .