Pay-for-Performance and Work Motivation: Comparing Motivation between Two Compensation Systems in US Federal Agencies*
Received: Feb 10, 2012; Revised: Feb 21, 2012; Revised: Mar 23, 2012; Accepted: Apr 04, 2012
Published Online: Apr 30, 2012
Abstract
While private-sector managerial practices are being widely adopted in the public sector, few studies have investigated how market mechanisms influence the motivation or behavior of members of public organizations, or whether there is a systematic difference in employee motivation or behavior between marketcentered settings and traditional civil service environments within the public sector. Analyzing large-scale survey data, this study investigates the difference in employee motivation between two compensation systems in the US federal government: pay-for-performance and general schedule. The empirical findings show that employees working in pay-for-performance systems tend to place a higher value on extrinsic values such as pay, performance ratings, and promotion than those in general-schedule systems. This indicates that market-centered managerial practices may undermine the public service motivation of public servants while attracting extrinsically motivated employees to the public sector.
Metrics
QR Code of this Article:
Related Articles
Transformational Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Egypt: Roles of Organizational Commitment, Public Service Motivation, and Organizational Justice
J. Policy Stud. 2023;38(4):23-39.
The Motivational Dynamics of Social Entrepreneurial Intention: The Interactive Effects Between Monetary Rewards and Social Recognition
J. Policy Stud. 2022;37(4):17-37.
Innovative Behavior in Public Sector Services Public Service Motivation and Private Sector Experience*
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2020;35(3):67-86.
Higher Public Service Motivation for Accepting Public Sector Pension Reform? Evidence from Korean Government Organizations*
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2019;34(1):13-42.
Should I Stay or Should I Go: The Impact of Public Duty Motivation on Turnover Intentions*
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2013;28(2):1-24.