THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN REWARDS AND EMPLOYEE...

ijcrb.webs.com

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

543

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN REWARDS AND EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE

Payam Gohari1, Akram Ahmadloo

2, Majid Bakhtiari Boroujeni

3, Seyed Jafar Hosseinipour

4

1Master of Business Administration, Multimedia University, Malaysia,

2Master of Business Administration, Islamic Azad University, Iran,

3Master of Business Administration, Multimedia University, Malaysia,

4PhD student of Policy Study, Perdana school, UTM, Malaysia,

Abstract

Many studies have been conducted in the case of the effects of individual reward types on the

performance of firms‗ employees. However, there has never been a research which included

all intrinsic and extrinsic rewards simultaneously in a comprehensive model. Here in this

study, focusing on 77 filled up survey questionnaires by different employee types from two

Malaysian tourism companies, there has been an attempt to examine the role of different

reward types applying the Backward Multiple Regression technique.

Overall, the statistical results show that although all reward types (including intrinsic and

extrinsic types) have a direct positive relationship with employees‗ performance based on the

correlation test, three types (i.e. appreciation, fringe benefits, and bonus) lose their importance

when they are considered in a more comprehensive model including other rewards.

Furthermore, the study shows that internal rewards have more powerful effects on employees‗

performance than the extrinsic rewards.

Keywords: Reward, Intrinsic Reward, Extrinsic Reward, Employee Performance, Malaysia

1. Overview

One of the main targets in any organization is adapting the changes of markets and

employees‗ needs. Thus, the managers have huge responsibilities to improve and arrange

these relations to act powerfully in the market (Beer, 1984) in which the strategies and the

composition of organizations have changed a lot. Therefore, the managers must compile their

plans to these changes to set missions, visions and predicted outputs as well as reaching

enough efficiency and effectiveness. To reach this goal, they must think about both employees

and customers and the way to communicate with them (Harmon, 2007).

Indeed, the ―employee‖ is the main concept to pay attention to in the human resource realm;

thus, they are assumed to form the main part of the human resource strategies that managers

ijcrb.webs.com



544

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

adopt in their organization. In this case, for example, when the line managers consider

rewards in their human resource strategies, they should prepare a suitable rewarding system

for their organization. Even the expertise of rewarding can give new challenging rewarding

policies to the organization; however, these policies are needed to be confirmed by the line

managers to execute them. In fact, human resource importance is clearer for line managers

today and if they do not note the new policies, it causes some negative results for them (Syed

Umar Farooq and Muahmmad Imran Ullah; Kalim Ullah Khan, 2010).

Rewarding has been found to be one of the main organizations‗ policies which can increase

the performance of staff and increase the outputs of organizations (Ajila, 1997). Indeed, with

the existing international economic development, many employers have comprehended this

fact that productivity is needed for their organizations to compete strongly and also their

employees‗ productivity is required in shaping the organization achievements. On the other

hand, employees‗ performance, as a result of the development and the growth is critical for

any organization.

This study provides an examination of the relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic rewarding on

employees‗ performance. Therefore, the rewarding (extrinsic and intrinsic rewarding) is

considered as independent and the employees‗ performance as dependent variables. In this

regard, although a lot of researches are established on reward and employees‗ performance, in

the real world it does not completely consider its importance. So, it is decided to focus on

determining it in the present study. The impact of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards on the

performances of employees has been chosen as the topic and issue. And the tourism

companies in Malaysia have been selected as the statistical population because the tourism

industry is very important in the current world and it can be one of the main income

generators for countries like Malaysia which is one of the top countries in hospitality and

tourism. In fact, the world knows this country as one of the best choices to spend holidays and

to travel. Therefore, motivating the industry‗s employees will impact a lot on the whole

income of the country if it is positive. The main reason of investment for Malaysia on this

industry is that the country lacks natural resources like gas, oil unlike Middle Eastern

countries. Thus, this country has chosen tourism industry as the main source of income and it

has been successful until now. Focusing on this point, the present study will examine the

employees‗ performance of Persian Travel Sdn. Bhd and Scicom firms as the target sample.

ijcrb.webs.com



545

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Scicom, on the other side, is one of the biggest contact centre outsourcing service providers in

Malaysia. Up until now, it has provided services to some companies such as the biggest global

MNCs in the world. They have a broad knowledge and skill in all contact centre operations,

including outsource and in-source operations, training, consulting, quality management and

certification services areas. It currently manages customer communications in 40 languages,

supports more than 89 countries, and delivers total customer pleasure to more than 40 million

customers all around the world.

2. The Relationship between Demographics Elements and Performance

As Bowen and Ostroff (2004) stated, in some countries, the High Performance Work System

(HPWS) and Job Satisfaction are two main conversational subjects. In fact, firms use HPWS

to improve employees‗ performance, satisfaction, and efficiency. Today, HPWS has been

applied as a new strategy for productive firms and is characterized as a type of human

resources management (HRM) which improves the firm‗s productivity. In this case, the

organizations try to find out about the connection between HPWS and different employee

theories‗ approaches which are linked to the demographic elements and to investigate about

its effectiveness on the high performance levels for the organizations.

Knowing about job satisfaction and HR issues varies based on demographic elements such as

gender, job position, rank, age and region. For example, in many of the developed countries,

younger workers get satisfied from extrinsic rewards more than intrinsic ones (Oshagbemi,

1996; Ronen, 1978; Siassi et al., 1975) and in underdeveloped nationalities, such as Uganda,

older employees gain more satisfaction from both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards in an equal

form (Ssesanga and Garrett, 2005). In addition, the women‗s satisfaction on salary and

promotion are more than men‗s in developing countries (Alam et al., 2005; Santhapparaj and

Alam, 2005).

Based on discussions by some of the researchers, there are two theories on HPWS; the first

one is social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), which discusses the relationship between job

satisfaction and HPWS and is expected to distribute future responsibility. In this regard, the

nature of return is not to be bargained but must be left to the arbitration of one who makes it.

The second theory is about the characters of Herzberg‗s (1959) motivation hygiene theory or

two factor theory, which discusses the elements of job satisfaction that are different from the

dissatisfaction causing elements.

Other findings on the effect of demographics on performance and satisfaction are discussed by

some authors. For instance, in many firms, female employees are shown to perceive various

ijcrb.webs.com



546

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

job satisfaction degrees compared to the men; and it indicates a bias among gender differences

(Hunjra, 2010). In addition, it is verified that employees‗ understanding of the organization‗s

culture, demographic factors (e.g age, gender, education), and job security, influences the

turnover rate (Cotton and Tuttle, 1986; Huselid, 1995).

Hypothesis 1: There is a significant and positive relationship between Demographic and

Performance

Hypothesis1a: Difference between genders of employees has significant effect on

performance

Hypothesis 1b: Difference between ages of employees has significant effect on performance

Hypothesis 1c: Difference between educational levels of employees has significant effect on

performance

Hypothesis 1d: Difference between work experiences of employees has significant effect on

performance

3. The Relationship between Rewarding and Performance

Rewarding is essential as an incentive and an unbreakable motivator to realize the

organizational performance. In addition, today, it has been adopted by different organizations

in both public and private sections. In downsizing, for instance, doing more with reward is

very important to elevate self-esteem and to establish kindness between managers and their

employees (Bowen, 2000).

On the whole, the employees‗ insight into the reward practice clarity depends on two factors:

complexity and communication. In other words, the requirement for a clear reward system

includes having an obvious communication of the offer and concentration on the rewards as

well as the concerns about comprehending the methodologies, targets, and measures applied

while introducing rewards. In this case, the employees need to know the relationship between

the firm‗s goals, their supply, and the way they are rewarded; and ambiguity in this regard

will decrease the motivation rewarding value (Gibbons, 1998). Pertaining to the reward

discussion, Ivana, Lovorka, and Nevenka (2009) discussed that rewarding must please an

open and full obvious regarding awards. On the other side, communication of the rewards‗

accessibility, the criteria for getting satisfied, and the award recipients recognition should be

accessed by rewards (Ivana et al. 2009).

ijcrb.webs.com



547

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Since the time Deci et al. (1971) published the result on the fact that extrinsic rewards

negatively affect intrinsic motivation, the numerous disagreements have been forwarded to

different OB generations. Although this issue finally took a back place in the area, the

argument has been continued until today. In addition, the drawn conclusions have shown to

deeply affect practically and hypothetically. On the whole, while motivation is at the heart of

organizational behavior, the interactive and direct effects of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards can

be the centre of the motivation study.

Extrinsic motivation behaviors include the actions that are extracted from external rewards,

such as payment, esteem, material properties, and positive evaluations. In addition, via the

change and the identification of environmental contingencies, involving extrinsic

empowerment, the increases of motivation are realized in workplace behaviors such as

attendance, selling, promptness, cost reduction, productivity, sales work quality, and customer

service (Komaki, 1982).

On the opposite side of extrinsic motivation, the intrinsic one is mentioned to exist when the

behavior is done for its exclusive aim rather than to access social empowerment or material.

The intrinsic motivation concept has been a significant challenge to behaviorism, and has its

roots in White‗s (1959) ―Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation 5‖, reflectance or competence

motivation. In this regard, Maslow (1943) and Alderfer (1969) addressed the same needs and

statements.

Hypothesis 2: Rewarding has significant and positive impact on employees‗ performance.

3.1. The Relationship between Financial Rewards (Extrinsic Reward) and

Performance

Extrinsic rewards are external to the job and include elements like fringe benefits, pay,

promotions, private office space, the social climate, and job security. Other examples are

competitive salaries, merit bonuses, pay raises, and indirect payment forms as compensatory

time off (Mahaney & Lederer, 2006; Mottaz, 1985).

Extrinsic rewards are often applied to demonstrate that the firm is serious about valuing group

contributions to quality. In this regard and as a subgroup, the financial rewards include cash as

bonus paid to team members. In fact, the bonus is paid separately from the wage and salary.

On the other hand, team rewards should be used in a way so that managers can avoid

destroying staffs‗ intrinsic motivation in doing their jobs. Indeed, the application of extrinsic

rewards which are tightly related to team‗s performance can teach the members to become

hungry to money and to destroy their intrinsic interest in the job (Balkin & Dolan, 1997).

ijcrb.webs.com



548

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Extrinsic rewards also drive worker‗s morale and the distribution of these rewards always has

loomed large in companies, especially in accordance with performance evaluations in present

globalization eras (Appelbaum et al., 2011; Datta, 2012). Furthermore, giving rewards has

become a part of firm‗s policies as it has been shown to improve workers‗ performance and

the organization‗s productivity.

Based on all current literatures and by focusing on the links between all of the findings, one

can understand that an appropriate compensation package, including financial rewards, will

cause a higher performance and efficiency for the firm. This compensation package consists

of both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards. Extrinsic rewards include tangible and external

rewards to the attempts and performed tasks in terms of salary/pay, promotions, bonuses, job

security, incentives, etc. Overall, the highly involved workers who are oriented more to their

occupations are dependent more on intrinsic than extrinsic rewards (Wood, 1974). 28

In addition, a significant and direct association exists between extrinsic rewards and the

motivation of employees; however, it is verified that the companies do not spend sufficient

budget on financial rewards (Hafiza et al., 2011).

Hypothesis 2: There is a direct relationship between financial rewards and performance.

3.1.1. The Relationship between Pay and Performance

Two extrinsic reward types, which include suitable earnings (bonus and pay), and job security

are the most important factors between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards (Kulkarni, 1983).

Paying is a vital factor which affects employees‗ motivation. (Kalim et al., 2010)

Both motivation and satisfaction, as the antecedents of job and pay security, are the most

important job simulations to determine the future events and also satisfaction with promotion

opportunity is another striking motivator type (Clark, 2001). Rewarding is an initial step like

any other HR operations, especially when it confronts with salary, pay, and financial

recompense. These functions in HR are often applied in firms; but it is obvious that they refer

to the same concept (Milkovich & Newman, 2009; Bergmann & Scarpello, 2002). As

McShane & Vin Glinow (2005) and Henderson (2009) mentioned in a HR management

scope, rewarding is often seemed as an employer‗s system, who designs and runs the different

types of wage systems to the employees who provide services or accomplish a confident task.

It should be noted that employers plan on rewarding systems are based on their employees‗

efficiency and effectiveness.

ijcrb.webs.com



549

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

The motivation by pay is based on seniority and is a reward when the staffs do the job well

and tend to receive monetary reward; and in such a system, the pay level is because of the

staffs‗ skills, attempt, and doing their responsibilities as well as the job status (Figart, 2000;

Bergmann & Scarpello, 2002; McShane & Von Glinow, 2005).

In a worldwide competitive period, employers have altered the rewarding system paradigms

from a usual performance-based compensation to a new kind which is based on the firm‗s

strategy and maintain the goals at appropriate levels (Lawler, 2000; Henemen et al., 2000).

Performance-based pay includes two kinds: group performance pay and individual

performance like value bonus, pay, promotion and other different pay types (Milkovich &

Newman, 2009). Although the pay rewarding performance has different kinds, most of the

managers use the same methods to compensate and this way includes adding extra money to

the wage base (Lawler et al., 1993; Chang & Hahn, 2006; Lee et al., 1999).

Hypothesis 2a: Pay/Salary has significant and positive impact on employee performance.

3.1.2. The Relationship between Bonus, Fringe benefit and Performance (Including

Salary Sacrificing)

The current employees‗ performance can be nurtured by managing a valid performance

evaluation, bonus and reward system (Bretz, et al., 1992). It should be considered that the

amount of fringe benefits (or certain payback) and bonuses are varied among well-performing

and weak-performing employees.

The motivation, which is the result of employees‗ encouragement by cash or other things such

as bonuses (e.g. car loan and payment increase), will lead to employees‗ productivity and

better performance. Therefore, it is important to recognize which rewarding strategies lead to

higher employees‗ productivity and to enhance their performance. Considering the result of

this study, it can be determined that different motivating elements like promotion and

bonuses, and suitable payment compensation have significant connection with higher

performance (Oyebanju, 2009).

Hypothesis 2b: Bonus has significant and positive on employee performance

Hypothesis 2c: Fringe Bonus has significant and positive on employee performance

ijcrb.webs.com



550

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

3.1.3. The Relationship between Promotion and Performance

An optimistic link exists between job uncertainty and intentions to turnover; and also there is

a small negative association between job insecurity and employees‗ commitment (Filipkowski

& Johnson, 2008). Furthermore, there is a direct link between job satisfaction elements like

pay, promotion, co-workers, and the work condition itself and the performance of the

employees.

Promotion is an important feature of employee‗s life style and occupation, affecting other job

experience levels (Kosteas 2009, Cobb-Clark 2001; Blau and DeVaro 2007; Francesconi

2001; Hersch & Viscusi, 1996; Pergamit & Veum 1999; Olson & Becker, 1983; McCue,

1996) and can have an obvious impact on other job aspects like job attachment and

responsibilities. In this case, the firms can apply promotions as a compensation factor for

high-performance employees, developing an encouragement for them to do their superior

effort. Additionally, promotion can influence the instrument of exerting better attempts, if

employees put an important value on it. If not, the companies would focus on pay increase to

reward high effort and productivity. Indeed, the employees may be worth the promotions

since they make an increase in job services like spending account or a bigger office (the

visible elements which managers do not have enough information about) or since they enjoy

good performance; and this is the result of the promotion (Pergamit & Veum, 1999).

Hypothesis 2d: Promotion has significant and positive impact on Employee Performance.

3.2. The Relationship between Non-financial rewards and Performance

Non-financial rewards may include higher status, recognition, more responsibility, positive

feedback, and more assertiveness. In hindsight, recognition is one of the main significant non-

financial rewards that are specifically valued by some staffs. In this regard, being noticed and

valued can be a majestic motivator which encourages workers to stay with a manager (Frey,

1997).

Although the extrinsic rewards enhance a subsistence level, the intrinsic ones are strong

motivators just as much. In fact, staffs need to be motivated by intrinsic rewards such as being

satisfied by doing an effective job and a feeling to do something valuable and worthwhile.

However, both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards stimulate the employees to have higher levels of

performance and productivity (Reio & Callahon, 2004). Overall, intrinsic motivation,

ijcrb.webs.com



551

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

obtained from person or its movement, impacts the performance and the well-being feeling

(Ryan & Deci, 2000).

On the other hand, other rewards should not be noted as a substitution for a valid pay plan.

However, they can also motivate and inspire employees to stay with the firm. Some of these

rewards are additional birthday and holiday‗s presents, work-life balance benefits (e.g.

flexible working hours, free tea and coffee, cinema tickets, and subsidized different sport

facilities, subsidized services or goods related to business networks or suppliers).

These benefit types are valued by staffs since they enhance the working life. Furthermore,

rewarding the employees‗ attempts and causing them to feel appreciated will add value to the

hiring contract. In fact, researchers should consider the outcomes that the rewards may cause

for both employee and employer. To redefine intrinsic rewards, remember that they exist in

the job itself like satisfaction of being prosperous in performing a task, getting admiration

from management, and autonomy; however, extrinsic ones are tangible rewards such as pay,

fringe benefits, bonuses, and promotions (Ajila & Abiola, 2004).

Relevantly, the self-determination theory is derived from the work of Edward Deci and

Richard Ryan (1985). They assume that self-determination is obtained by an intrinsic

motivation, which means that it gives satisfaction to the person without any paying.

Motivation is the study of behavior principles; and behavior indicates the attempt to perform

situation adaptation (Franken, 2002). In this regard, Franken mentioned that employees have

an intrinsic motivation to overcome and survive. If the logical mind investigates a situation

and finds it out to be unthreatening, the brain shuts down the emotional response; and if the

environmental situations are recognized to be relaxed, then he/she feels no need to reply,

react, and defeat. Arguably, a person requires sufficient incentive to develop the internal

motivation to do something else. Additionally, the author states that rewarding for having

better performance or behavior is an external reward or motivation. While, those rewards,

similar to the viewpoint of reaching one‗s job height, develop an intrinsic motivation to

accomplish more. Then, the individual designs a path or action plan to realize that objective.

In addition, the emotions role is to enable individuals to develop one‗s situation and view, and

to create steps for feelings of stimulation to perform better.

Emotions guide people to effective experiences like displeasure or pleasure. They also assist a

person to form a cognitive clearance for cause and effect. Additionally, they influence

people‗s heartbeats and otherwise they will affect negatively on health and situations.

Moreover, emotions are good drivers for an individual as behavioral alternatives, such as

ijcrb.webs.com



552

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

adaptive, expressive, or goal-directive treatments. Goal-directive behavior is the association

between emotion, internal motivation, and improved perform. The emotional motivation

requires the development of an individual and the specialized relationship (Hiam, 1999).

Hypothesis 3: There is a significant and positive relationship between non-financial rewarding

and employee performance.

3.2.1. The Relationship between Appreciation, Recognition and Performance

Psychological or intangible rewards (intrinsic) such as recognition and appreciation plays an

important role in motivating employees and raising their performance. Relevantly, the

employees‗ commitment is based on appreciation and rewards (Andrew, 2004).

The relationship should be established based on trust so that people find out their leader keeps

their best interest at heart. Indeed, individuals‗ roles will be done better with the availability of

social support and an affiliation intelligence (McClelland, 1989); and people discover or seek

issues when they have developed a security feeling (Frodi et al., 1985). In this regard, the

staffs with a good performance will predict that their significant contributions will be realized

and valued by the top managers (Bowen, 2000).

Hypothesis 3a: Appreciation has significant and positive impact on employee performance.

3.2.2. The Relationship between Empowerment and Performance

According to Deci and Ryan (2000), intrinsic motivation is accessed by a feeling of

autonomy, and by not feeling controlled. In this regard, other studies have concluded that

intrinsic motivation includes a feeling of competence which can be raised by positive

performance feedback; and on the other hand, can be declined by a negative performance

feedback.

To reach to that level, leaders should give protection, instruction, advice, instruments, and all

other needed resources to ensure that knowledge and development is being managed. The

worker, on the other hand, should have the feeling and attitude toward ―I can do‖, and the

supervisor must nurture this feeling instead of being distracted, abusive, and a quick criticizer.

Indeed, the supervisor must train, support, and help employees improve their competencies.

An emotionally-clever manager is able to join with his subordinates emotions and relate this

knowledge to the setting of the firm. Similarly, the emotionally-intelligent manager is

ijcrb.webs.com



553

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

responsible for generating interest and hope. That emotion will cause intrinsic motivation,

which will lead performance to soar in turn (Goleman et al., 2004).

Hypothesis 3b: Empowerment/ Autonomy has significant and positive impact on Employee

Performance

3.2.3. The Relationship between Delegation and Performance

Delegation is a process which includes assigning tasks to subordinates, giving responsibility

to the subordinates for formal decisions made by the manager, and raising the amount of

allowed job-related discretion to subordinates, involving the authority in making decisions

without looking for prior manger‗s approval (Yukl and Fu, 1999). In this case, Leanna (1986)

argues that delegation is different from other decision making procedures, like participation,

in two major ways: (1) delegation includes decision makings by an individual subordinate

instead of by subordinates as a group or by supervisors; and (2) delegation puts emphasis on

subordinates‗ autonomy in decision making (Leanna, 1986; Locke & Schweiger, 1979).

Relevantly, in the Western empirical and theoretical literature, delegation is widely known as

a necessary factor of effective management. Four benefits of delegation identified from the

literature include: (1) delegation fulfils managers‗ need for success and autonomy by

introducing a stimulus for more entrepreneurial behavior and motivation (Mintzberg, 1979);

(2) delegation decreases the work overload for upper level managers (Yukl and Fu, 1999); (3)

it provides a training area for the more complicated strategic decisions which managers are

likely to confront in top-level managerial positions (Yukl and Fu, 1999); and (4) delegation

puts decisions in levels at which there could be greater specialty on particular problems which

provides extra information processing advantages to the firm; and this may result in better

quality and more efficient decisions (Ito & Person, 1986; Galbraith, 1973). Therefore, the

Western firms‗ behavior and the literatures (e.g., Leanna, 1986, Argyris, 1964; Yukl and Fu,

1999; Johnstone, 2000; Schriesheim et al., 1998) have acknowledged the positive association

between delegation and job-related consequences, such as job satisfaction and subordinate

performance.

Hypothesis 3c: Delegation has significant and positive impact on Employee Performance

ijcrb.webs.com



554

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

4. Method and Results

The current study has a quantitative research approach, which is chosen based on the research

objectives. The research examines the relationship between financial and nonfinancial rewards

and employees‗ performance, therefore, the employees of two tourist companies including

Persian Sdn.Bhd and Scicom were chosen as the statistical population. Also, the financial and

nonfinancial rewards have been chosen as the independent, and the employees‗ performance

has been selected as the dependent variables.

The applied instrument for this study is a survey questionnaire which consists of three

sections. The first section includes general information about the respondents containing 6

statements (i.e. gender, age, marital status, education, work experience, and position).

Section B includes 20 statements to investigate the relationship between pay, promotion,

bonus, fringe benefits, appreciation, empowerment, and delegation. Furthermore, this section

has a statement about total performance of the respondent.

Section C includes 28 statements and investigates the variables in section B for getting more

exact results.

Section D includes one statement and investigates the employees performance. (See Figure 1)

ijcrb.webs.com



555

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Figure 1: Propose Framework

The answers are measured using Likert‗s 5-point scale including ―very satisfied (5), satisfied

(4), neutral (3), dissatisfied (2), very dissatisfied (1) for section B. Also, section C consists of

28 statements which examine the choices of employees on reward system tools, motivation,

and their performance.

100 employees were randomly selected and a total of 77 filled up questionnaires were

returned. Therefore, the response rate is 77% for this study which is higher than the expected

response rate. Furthermore, the hypotheses used in the research are tested through statistical

methods, and the selection of the statistical tests are based on the level of data measurement,

the influence of the selected statistical test, the validity of the used instrument for measuring

the variables, and the research methodological limitations (Teddie & Tashakkori, 2008).

Meanwhile, the reason for asking socio-demographic questions is to investigate the average

employees‗ response rate according to their age, education level, and etc. Besides, the

position, education level, and work experience of the respondents are necessary to check the

validity of the answers and also the aim is to know whether these factors have any relationship

with performance.

ijcrb.webs.com



556

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

For testing reliability of the dimensions, Cronbach‗s alpha values are tested in, as all values

were greater than 0.7, it can be concluded that all of the dimensions are reliable.

Table 1 demonstrates the differences between the performance of two groups of respondents

including males and females. Indeed, the test of independent t-test shows that there is no

significant difference between these two groups.

Table1: Independent t-test for gender

Furthermore, the same result is obtainable from Tables 2; the difference between groups is not

significant at the p<0.05 level. Therefore, performance difference does not exist between

married and single respondents.

Table 2: Independent t-test for marital status

For other socio-demographic variables, the one-way ANOVA test is run as there are more

than two categories for each. Table 3 shows the statistical results for the Age variable. In fact,

the non-significant values give the proof that no difference is available in performance for

different groups of respondents based on their age.

ijcrb.webs.com



557

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Table 3: ANOVA for age

Next table (Table 4) also indicates that there is no difference in performance between different

groups of people focusing on their work experiences. In fact, the significance value of 0.252

proves this statement because the value is greater than the 0.05 cut point.

Table 4: ANOVA for work experience

The results are also correspondent for the different groups of people based on their education

degrees. Table 5 provides the non-significant value of 0.20.

Table 5: ANOVA for education degree

Finally, ANOVA test is run to check the performance differences for different groups of

people with different job positions. In this regard, the value of 0.899 non-significant from

ijcrb.webs.com



558

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Table 4.15 indicates that people in different positions have had the same levels of

performance.

Table 6: ANOVA for positions

From these results, it can be concluded that for different categories of gender, age, work

experience, job position, marital status and education of the employees, there are not any

differences among their performances. Therefore, the demographic elements brought in this

study do not have any relationship with the performance and in fact, they do not change the

performance levels in a significant manner.

So, as the result of the demographic-related hypothesis which was about the direct

relationship between it and the employees‗ performance, the main hypothesis i.e. H1, and its

sub-hypotheses including H1a, H1b, H1c, H1d, H1e are rejected; and this shows that the

demographic elements have no effects on the performance. In other words, different

demographic categories make no difference in the performance levels. For example, about the

gender, the male and female are shown to have the same performance; and it is true for other

demographic elements in this study.

To examine the relationships between other independent variables (i.e. empowerment,

appreciation, delegation, pay, bonus, and fringe) and ―performance‖ as the dependent factor,

multiple regression technique has been run in the backward mode. However, before reporting

the results, it should be noted that considering the obtained values from bivariate correlation

test (Table 7), all of the mentioned variables have a significant relationship with performance

individually.

ijcrb.webs.com



559

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Table 7: Bivariate Correlation

Also, it would be a valid idea to test the effect of these predicting factors on the dependent

variable once in a comprehensive model simultaneously. Therefore, backward multiple

regression technique is applied to do that. The results shown in Table 8 indicate that by four

times of rotation, the regression model has reached an optimum level.

Table 8: Model Rotation Values

Table 9 shows the rotated model coefficients for each independent variable. As it is obvious

from the table, since the regression technique is run in the backward mode, all variables are

entered in the original model. Then, the variable with the least significant coefficient has been

eliminated; and this has happened in the next rotation steps. Finally, the last rotation results

show that by removing three factors (i.e. appreciation, bonus, and fringe), the model will be

optimum and significant enough for providing the conclusions.

ijcrb.webs.com



560

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Table 9: Table of coefficient

Furthermore, the direct relationship between pay and the employees‗ performance is

correspondent with the studies by (Kalim, et al, 2010) who concluded that pay is a significant

factor which impacts the employees‗ motivation. Other studies (Bergmann et al., 2002; Figart,

2000; McShane & Von Glinow, 2005) concluded on the motivating role of pay as a monetary

ijcrb.webs.com



561

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

reward. They confirmed that when the employee does his/her tasks well, this type of reward is

very important and has a high impact on their performance.

Additionally, about the direct relationship between the bonus plus fringe benefits and

employee performance which is resulted from the current study, it is compatible with the

research done by Bretz et al. (1992) who stated that the performance of the study can be

improved by qualified bonus system in the organization; and also it is adopted by the findings

of Oyebanju‗s, (2009) study who found that different suitable payment systems such as

compensation, promotion, fringe and bonus have significant relationships with performance.

Another extrinsic reward that is considered in the present study is promotion which like other

rewards types has a direct relationship with the employees‗ performance. This result is

supported by previous findings (e.g. Filipkowski & Johnson, 2008; Kosteas 2009; Blau &

DeVaro 2007; Cobb-Clark 2001; Francesconi 2001; Pergamit & Veum 1999; Hersch and

Viscusi, 1996; McCue, 1996; Olson & Becker, 1983; Pergamit and Veum 1999).

They support and agree to the fact that a direct relationship exists between promotion and

employees‗ performance. For example, Filipkowski and Johnson (2008) stated that there is a

link between the lack of promotion and weaker performance. This finding indicates the

importance of the promotion chance in the organizations and shows that when the employees

have more chance for improvement and to be more advanced, they will try more and do their

tasks better with more excitement; and it is important to consider this element in the

organizations to motivate them more for having a better outcome.

To sum up, while all of the extrinsic rewards in the current study have a direct relationship

with the employees‗ performance, it is possible to assume that the extrinsic rewards are the

only ones to have a direct relationship with performance. However, Frey (1997) stated that

both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards have an initial impact on employees‗ performance.

Consistently, hypotheses 3, 3a, 3b, and 3c are supported in the existing study.

On the other hand, hypothesis number 2 which is about the direct relationship between

rewarding and performance is proven by this study. Previous studies with the same result

include (e.g. Bowen (2000); Porter et al. (1975); Prendergast (1999), Jibowo (1977); Egwuridi

(1981)).

So, based on these statements, it is better to have a good reward system in the organization

and evaluate it on the employees‗ performance to know more about its strengths and

weaknesses and to improve it. Today, the world is experiencing a human resource competition

ijcrb.webs.com



562

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

among the companies thus, to be more successful in this kind of market, considering the best

motivators to make the employee satisfied and more qualified, hard work is essential.

To conclude, the employees need to be more identified, and their needs should be clearer to

manage a better rewarding system. For example, the culture, income, and the family situation

of the employees have an effect on their preferences of the reward kinds. So, the detail and the

exact information about the employee is one of the main tasks of the organization‗s managers;

and also conducting some surveys among the employee about their reward type preference

can be helpful.

Indeed, the managers should consider the employees‗ preferences of the rewards types to be

more successful in motivating them, and should know that this evaluation is very important if

they want to be successful in the human resource development of their companies.

Overall, the statistical results show that although all reward types (including intrinsic and

extrinsic ones) have a direct positive relationship with employees‗ performance based on the

correlation test, three reward types (i.e. appreciation, fringe, and bonus) lose their importance

when they are considered in a more comprehensive model including other rewards.

Furthermore, the study shows that internal rewards have more powerful effects on employees‗

performance than the extrinsic ones.

5. Conclusion

This study includes two objectives: first, evaluating the influence of the demographic

elements (age, gender, marital status, job position, work experience and education level), and

second, assessing the impact of the reward elements (both extrinsic and intrinsic) on the

employees‗ performance in two Malaysian tourism organizations as the study‗s sample

population. The aim of choosing the study population is the ranking of Malaysia as one of the

most important countries in the tourism industry, and therefore, this research is very important

for this nation as the industry is one of the main income generators.

On the whole, based on the obtained results, first the relationship between the demographic

and rewards elements is investigated. From these results, it can be concluded that for different

categories of gender, age, work experience, job position, marital status and education of the

employees, there are not any differences among their performances. Therefore, the

demographic elements brought in this study do not have any relationship with the

performance and in fact, they do not change the performance levels in a significant manner.

ijcrb.webs.com



563

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Additionally, the results of the statistical analysis for the relationship between rewarding

elements and employees‗ performance indicate that there is a significant positive relationship

between pay, bonus, fringe benefits, promotion, appreciation, empowerment, and delegation

in one hand and employees‗ performance on the other hand.

Suggestions for Future Studies

As there was a discussion on more related potential variables to the rewards, which can be the

employees‗ performance predictors, one of the main things that should be considered in future

studies is taking them into account. Some of them include the number of children, the home

situation (rent, landlords), and the income amount. These items help to analyze the financial

rewards and their relationship with performance better. For example, the wealthy people

perhaps consider the intrinsic rewards more important than extrinsic.

The other suggestion for improving future studies is to consider the previous studies more

based on a more variety of situations in terms of geographic, economic, and cultural elements

to make the study more popular and to know the differences of priorities better.

ijcrb.webs.com



564

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

References

Ajila, C.O. (1997). Job Motivation and Attitude to Work as Correlates of Productivity Among

Workers in Manufacturing Companies in Lagos State. Nigeria. Unpublished PH.D Thesis

submitted to the Department of Psychology O.A.U Ile-Ife Osun State, Nigeria.

Ajila, Cand, Abiola, A. (2004). Influence of Rewards on Workers Performance in an

Organization, Journal of Social Science, 8(1), pp.7-12

Ajzen, I. (2001) Construction of a Standard Questionnaire for the Theory of Planned

Behavior, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Akerele, A.( 1991). ―Role of labour in productivity.‖ Nigeria Journal of Industrial Relation, 5:

50-58

Alam, S. S., Tallha, M., Civanand, N. C. and Ahsan, N. M., (2005), ―Job Satisfaction of

University Women Teachers in Bangladesh‖ Journal of social sciences, Volume2, pp.188-91.

Alderfer, C. P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs. Organizational

Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 143-175.

Andrew, D and Kent, R. (2007). ‗The impact of perceived leadership behaviors on

satisfaction, commitment, and motivation: An expansion of the multidimensional model of

leadership‘, International Journal of Coaching Science, 1(1), p 35-56

Assam, A.P. (1982). Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Unpublished MSc Dissertation

University of Lagos, Nigeria. Banjoko, S.A. (1996). Human resource management. Lagos:

Saban Publishers. Bergum, B and J. Lehr. 1984. ―Monetary incentives and Vigilance.‖ Journal

of Experimental Psychology, No. 7: 197-198.

Baker, G.P. (2002). Distortion and Risk in Optimal Incentive Contracts. Journal of Human

Resources, 37, 728–751.

Baron, R. A. (1983). Behavior in organizations, p. 123, New York: Allyn& Bacon, Inc.

Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P.R., Mills, D.Q., & Walton, R.E. (1984). Managing

humanassets. New York: The Free Press.

BERGMANN, T.J.; SCARPELLO, V.G. (2002).Compensation decision making. United

States: South-Western Thomson Learning.

Bergmann, T.J and V.G Scarpello (2002), Compensation Decision Making, Australia: South-

Western Thomson Learning

Bergum, B and J. Lehr.(1984). ―Monetary incentives and Vigilance.‖ Journal ofExperimental

Psychology, No. 7: 197-198.

Bernard, H. R. (2005). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative

Approaches (4th ed.). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Bishop, J. (1987). The recognition & Reward of Employee Performance, Journal of Labor

Economics Vol. 5, No. 4 Part 2: The New Economics of Personnel pp. S36-S56.

Blau, P. M.,( 1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley

Blau, F.D., &DeVaro, J. (2007). ―New Evidence on Gender Differences in Promotion Rates:

An Empirical Analysis of a Sample of New Hires.‖ Industrial Relations , 46 (3), 511-550.

Bowen, B.B, (2000). Recognizing and rewarding employees, McGraw-Hill.

Bowen, D. E., &Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM-firm performance linkages: The role

of the ―strength‖ of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29, 203–221

Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The Current State of Performance

Appraisal Research and Practice: Concerns, Directions, and Implications. Journal of

Management, 18, 321-352.

Carraher, R, Gibson, A. & Buckley R (2006)..Compensation in the Baltic and the USA, Baltic

Journal of Management Vol. 1, pp 7-23.

Centres and O, Bugental.(1970). ―Intrinsic and Extrinsic Job motivators among different

segments of the working population.‖ Journal of Applied Psychology, 50: 193-197. Colvin, G.

ijcrb.webs.com



565

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

(1998). What money makes you do. Fortune 138 (4), 213-214. Daniel and Caryl. 1981.

―Exchange variables as predictors of job commitment and turnover. The impact of rewards

cost alternation and investments‖ Journal of Organizational Behaviour and Human

Performance, 27: 78-95.

Chang, E., & Hahn, J. (2006). Does pay-for-performance enhance perceived distributive

justice for collectivistics employees? Personnel Review, 35 (4), 397-412.

Clark, M. D. (2001). Change-focused youth work: The critical ingredients of positive

behavior change. Journal of the Center for Families, Children & the Courts, 3, 59- 72.

Cobb-Clark, D. A. (2001). ―Getting ahead: determinants of and payoffs to internal promotion

of young US men and women‖ in Polachek, S.W. (e.d.)., Worker Wellbeing in a Changing

Labour Market, 20, 339-372.

Creswell, J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: Sage.

Daniel and Caryl. 1981. ―Exchange variables as predictors of job commitment and turnover.

The impact of rewards cost alternation and investments‖ Journal of Organizational Behaviour

and Human Performance, 27: 78-95.

Darling, K., Arm, J., and Gatlin, R. (1997).How to effectively reward employees. Industrial

Management,

July/August, 1-4.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human

behavior. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E.L., R. Koestner, and R.M. Ryan, (1999a).A meta-analytic review of experiments

examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin,

125: 627-668

Deci, E.L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 18: 105-115.

Deci, E.L. (1980). The psychology of self-determination. Lexington, MA: Heath.

Deeprose, D. (1994). How to recognize and reward employees. New York: AMACOM.

Dewhurst, M., Guthridge, M., Mohr, E., (2010). Motivating people: getting beyondmoney,

Business Source Complete.

Egwuridi, P.C.( 1981). Job Satisfaction: Effects on Job Characteristics. Unpublished MSc

Dissertation University of Lagos, Nigeria.

Eisenberger, R. (1992). Learned industriousness. Psychological Review, 99, 248–267.

Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., &Pretz, J. (1998). Can the promise of reward increase creativity?

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 704–714.

Eisenberger, R., and Cameron, J. (1996).Detrimental Effects of Reward, American

Psychologist, Vol.51, No.11, pp.1153-1166.

Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

American Psychologist,51, 1153–1166.

Eisenberger, R., Pierce, W.D., and Cameron, J. (1999). Effects of reward on intrinsic

motivation—Negative, neutral, and positive: Comment on Deci, Koestner, and Tyan (1999).

Psychological Bulletin, 125, 677-691.

Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001).Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 728–741.

Evans, James R. and Lindsay, William M. (2003).The Management and Control of Quality,

5th edition.US:Thomson.

Fairbank, J. F., & Williams, S. D. (2001). Motivating creativity and enhancing innovation

through employee suggestion system technology. Creativity and Innovation Management ,10 ,

68–74

ijcrb.webs.com



566

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Filipkowski, M. and Johnson, C. M. (2008). Comparisons of Performance and Job Insecurity

in Union and Nonunion Sites of a Manufacturing Company, Journal of Organizational

Behavior Management, Vol.28, No.4, pp.218 – 237.

Figart, M. (2000). Equal pay for equal work: The role of job evaluation in an evolving social

norm. Journal of Economic Issues, Vol.34, pp.1-19.

Flynn, J.R.( 1998). ―IQ gains over time: Toward finding the causes.‖ In U. Neisser, ed. The

rising curve: Long-term gains in IQ and Related measures . Washington DC: American

Psychological Association, 25-66.

Franken, R. E. (2002). Human Motivation (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Francesconi, M. (2001).―Determinants and consequences of promotions in Britain.‖ Oxford

Bulletin of Economics and Statistics , 63(3), 279-310.

Frey. B. (1997).On the Relationship between Intrinsic and Extrinsic Work Motivation.

International Journal of Industrial Organization, 15, p 427 – 439.

Frodi, A., Bridges, L., &Grolnick, W. (1985).Correlates of mastery-related behavior: A short-

term longitudinal study of infants in their second year. Child Development , 56 , 1291– 1298.

Galbraith, J.K. (1973). Controls or competition - what's at issue? Review of Economics and

Statistics, 55(4),524-538.

Gibbons, R. (1998). Incentives in Organizations. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12, 115–

132.

Goetsch, David and Davis, Stanley. (2003). Quality Management: Introduction to Total

Quality Management for Production, Processing, and Services, 4th edition. New Jersey:

Prentice Hall.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2004). Primal leadership: Learning to lead with

emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Guest, D.E. and Conway, N. (2005), Well-being and the Psychological Contract, CIPD,

London

Grantham, C. E., Ware, J. P., & Williamson, C. (2007). Corporate agility: A revolutionary

new model for competing in a flat world . New York: AMACOM.

Hackman, R. (Ed.). (1990). Groups that work (and those that don't): Creating conditions for

effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hackman, J.R., and Oldham, G.R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a

theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.

Hadjimanolis, A. (2000). An Investigation of Innovation Antecedents in Small Firms in the

Context of a Small Developing Country, R&D Management, Vol.30, No.3, pp.235-245.

Hafiza N. S., Shah S. S., Jamsheed H., Zaman K.(2011) - Relationship Between Rewards and

Employee's ... Business Intelligence Journal Vol.4 No.2.328

Hage, J., and Dewar, R. (1973).Elite Values Versus Organizational Structure in Predicting

Innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.18, No.3, pp.279-290.

Harmon, P.,(2007). Business process change: (Second Edition) A guide for business managers

and BPM and Six Sigma professionals, Business Process Trends, The MK/OMG Press.

Henderson, R.I. (2009). Compensation management in a knowledge based-world. New Jersey:

Prentice-Hall.

Heneman, R. L., Ledford Jr., G. E., & Gresham, M. T. (2000). The changing nature of work

and its

effects on compensation design and delivery. In S. Rynes& B. Gerhart (Eds.),

Compensationin organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hersch, J., &Viscusi, W. K. (1996).―Gender differences in promotions and wages.‖ Industrial

Relations, 35(4), 461-472.

Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: how do you motivate employees? Harvard Business

Review, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 53-62.

ijcrb.webs.com



567

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., and Snyderman, B.B., (1959), The motivation to work, New York:

John Wiley & Sons.

Hunjra, A. I., Ali, M. A., Chani, M. I. , Khan, H., &Rehman, K. U. (2010). Employee voice

and intent to leave: An empirical evidence of Pakistani banking sector.American Journal of

Business Management, 4 (14), 3056-3061.

Ivana, N. Lovorka, G. &Nevenka, C. (2009). Corporate Culture and Innovation: Implications

for Reward Systems. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 397-402.

Jibowo, A.A.( 1977). ―Effect of motivators and hygiene factors on job p Erformance among

extension workers in the former Western State of Nigeria‖. The Quarterly Journal of

Administration,12 (1): 45- 54.

Janssen, O. (2000). Job Demands, Perceptions of Effort- Reward Fairness and Innovative

Work Behavior, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol.73, No.3,

pp.287-302.

Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness Perceptions as a Moderator in the Curvilinear Relationships

between Job Demands, and Job Performance and Job Satisfaction. Academy of Management

Journal, 44, 1039–1050.

Johnson, R.E., Chang, C., and Yang, L., (2010). Commitment and motivation at work: the

relevance of employee identity and regulatory focus, Academy of Management Review, vol.

35, no. 2, pp. 226-245.

Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential

correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,22, 80-

87

Kayode, A.Y.( 1973). ―Beefing up workers productivity.‖The Quarterly Journal

ofAdministration,9: 915. Kulkarni, P. 1983. ―Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision

Processes . New Delhi: McCoy Hill.

Khan, K. U., Farooq, S. U., &Ullah, M. I. (2010).Therelationship between rewards and

employee motivation in commercial banks of Pakistan.Research Journal of international

studies, 14, 37-52.

Kohn, A. (1993). Why incentive plans cannot work.Harvard Business Review, September-

October, 54-63.

Kosteas, V.D. (2009). ―Job level changes and wage growth.‖ International Journal of

Manpower. 30(3,) 269-284

Kulkarni, P. (1983). ―Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes. New Delhi:

McCoy Hill.

Lawler, E.E., (1973).Motivation in Work Organizations . Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole

Lawler, E.E. (1985). ―The effects of performance of job satisfaction.‖ Industrial Relations, 7:

20-28.

Lawler III, E. E. (2000).Rewarding excellence: pay strategies for the new economy. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Lawler, E. E. (2003). Treat people right. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Lawler, E.E., Ledford, G., & Chang, L. (1993). Who uses skill-based pay, and why.

Compensation and Benefits Review, March-April, 22-26.

Lawler, E.E., & Cohen, S. G. (1993).Designing Pay Systems for Teams.Centerfor Effective

Organizations Publications T 92-12 (215), University of Southern California.

Lee, C., Law, K.S., &Bobko, P. (1999). The importance of justice perceptions on pay

effectiveness: A two-year study of a skill-based pay plan. Journal of Management, 25 (6),

851-873.

ijcrb.webs.com



568

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Lepper, M.R., Green, D., and Nisbett, R.E. (1973).Undermining children‘s intrinsic interest

with extrinsic reward: A test of the ―overjustification‖ hypothesis. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 28, 129-137.

Locke, E. A., &Henne, D. (1986). Work motivation the-ories. In C. K. Cooper & I. Robertson

(Eds.),International review of industrial and organizational psychology.New York: Wiley

McCue,K.(1996).Promotions and Wage Growth.Journal of Labor Economics,14(2),175-209.

McShane, S.L., & Von Glinow, M.A. (2005).Organizational behavior. Irwin: McGraw-Hill.

Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.

Mawhinney, T.C. (1990). Decreasing intrinsic ―motivation‖ with extrinsic rewards: Easier

said than done. Promoting excellence through performance management. Haworth Press.

Mayo, A. (1998). Memory bankers. People Management, 4(2), 34-38.e.g., Mawhinney, 1990

McCLELLAND, D. (1989) Human Motivation, Madrid: Narcea, S.A. de Ediciones

McCormick and J. Tifflin.(1979). Industrial Psychology; New York: George, Allen and

Unwin.

Milkovich, G. T., & Newman, J. M. (2002); Compensation (7th ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill, New

York, NY.

Milkovich, G.T. & Newman J.M. (2009).Compensation. New York: McGraw Hill.

Mumford, M.D. (2000). Managing Creative People: Strategies and Tactics for Innovation,

Human Resource Management Review, Vol.10, No.3, pp.313-351.

Nas, T. (2006),

‗Sa�lıkÖrgütlerindeÖdüllendirmeSistemlerininPerformansÜzerindekiEtkisiveBirUygulama‘‘

(The Effects of Reward Systems in Health Organizations on Performance: An

Application‘‘,,Gazi University, Institute of Social Sciences, Master Thesis.

Nwackukwu, C.C.( 1994). ―Effective leadership and productivity.Evidence from a national

survey of industrial organization.‖ African Journal for the Study of Social Issues, 1: 38-46.

Olson,C.A.&Becker,B.E.(1983).Sex Discrimination in the Promotion Process.Industrial&

Labor Relations Review,36(4),624-641

Oshagbemi, T. (1996).Job satisfaction of UK academics.Educational

ManagementAdministration& Leadership, 24(4), 389.

Oyegbaju, Omoloye (2009).Influence of Management of Change, Organization

CommunicationClimate and Job Motivation on Staff Productivity in Academic and Research

Libraries in Ibadan,Nigeria.Fountain of Knowledge Journal of Library and Information

Science, 1(1)

Prasetya, A., & Kato, M. The Effect of Financial and Non Financial Compensation to the

Employee Performance.

Pergamit, M. R., &Veum, J. R. (1999). What is a Promotion?Industrial and Labor Relations

Review, 581-601.

Petcharak, P. (2002). The assessment of motivation in the Saint Paul Hotel employees.Ms.

Thesis, UW-Stout.Available at http://minds.wisconsin.edu/handle/1793/40589?show=full.

Porter, L.W., Lawler, E.E., III & Hackman, J.R. (1975), ‗Behavior in Organizations‘. New

York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Porter, L. and Lawler, E.E. III. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL:

Richard D. Irwin

Prendergast, C. (1999). The Provision of Incentives in Firms. Journal of Economic Literature,

37, 7–63.

Reid, S. (1987). Working with statistics: An introduction to quantitative methods for social

scientists. London: Polity.

ijcrb.webs.com



569

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

Reio, G, T. &Callahon, J. L. (2004).Affect, Curiosity, and socialization-related Learning; a

path analysis of antecedents to job performance, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol.19,

pp3-22.

Roberts R.L. (May, 2005): Relationship between rewards, recognition and motivation at

insurance company in the Western Cape: University Of The Western Cape.

Roberts, E.B. (1991). Entrepreneurs in HighTechnology: Lessons from MIT and Beyond,

New York: Oxford University Press.

Ronen, S. (1978).Job satisfaction and the neglected variable of job seniority.Human Relations,

31(4), 297

Rothwell, R. (1992). Successful Industrial Innovation: Critical Factors for the 1990s, R&D

Management, Vol.22, No.3, pp.221-239.

Ryan, R.M., and Deci, E.L. (2000).When rewards compete with nature: The undermining of

intrinsic motivation and self-regulation. See Sansone&Harackiewicz, pp. 14-54.

Sansone, C., and Harackiewicz, J.M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for

optimal motivation and performance. San Diego: Academic Press.

Santhaparaj, S. A. and Alam, S. S.,(2005), ―Job Satisfaction among Academic Staff inPrivate

Universities in Malaysia‖, journal of social science, volume 1 issue 2:72-76.

Sekaran, U. (2004),Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, John and

Wiley Inc., USA

Scott, S.G. and Bruce, R.A. (1994). Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of

Individual Innovation in the Workplace, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.37, No.3,

pp.580-599.

Schutt, R. (2006) Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research (5th ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA.

Siassi, I., Crocetti, G., & Spiro, H. R. (1975).Emotional health, life and job satisfaction in

aging workers.Industrial Gerontology.

Ssesanga, K., &Garrett, R. M. (2005).Job satisfaction of university academics: Perspectives

from Uganda. Higher Education, 50(1), 33-56.

Syedain, H. (1995). The rewards of recognition. Management Today, 72-75.

Staw, B.M. (1976). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Morristown, NJ: General Learning

Press.

Staw, B.M. (1977). Motivation in organizations: Toward synthesis and redirection. In B.M.

Staw and G.R. Salancik (Eds.), New directions in organizational behavior. Chicago: St. Clair

Press.

Steers, R. M. & Porter, L. W. (1987),Motivation and Work Behaviour and

Performance,4th

edn, Scott Foresman& Co.

Syedain, H. (1995). The rewards of recognition. Management Today, 72-75.

Teddie, C, &Tashakkori, A( 2008), Foundations of mixed methods research, Sage

Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 173-174.

Uen, J. F. &Chien, S. H. (2004). Compensation Structure, Perceived Equity and Individual

Performance of Rand Professionals. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 3, 401–

405

Urichuk, Bob. (1999). Employee recognition and praise. The Canadian Manager, 24(2), 27-

29.

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work Motivation. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Weiss, D., Dawis, R., England, G., &Lofquist, L. (1967).Manual for the Minnesota

Satsifaction Questionnaire (No. 22). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

Wemimont, P. F. (1966). Intrinsic and extrinsic factors hi job satisfaction. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 50, 41-50.

ijcrb.webs.com



570

JULY 2013

VOL 5, NO 3

White, R. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological

Review, 66, 297-333.

Williams, S.D. (2004). Personality, Attitude, and Leader Influences on Divergent Thinking

and Creativity in Organizations, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol.7, No.3,

pp.187-204.

Wood A.T. (1974). ―Effects of contingent and noncontingent rewards and control on intrinsic

motivation.‖ Organization Behaviour and Human Performance, No 8, pp 217-229.

Date post:	14-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	phamcong
View:	221 times
Download:	1 times

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN REWARDS AND EMPLOYEE...

Documents