A good reward system should motivate workers. It should also attract and retain the same workers. On the contrary, a bad reward system does not do either of these things. It only hinders workers from working hard or even scares them away (Amar 2001). In order to overcome such challenges, the senior management team of the university should understand that inasmuch as it intends to attract lecturers in the law discipline, it should also retain lecturers in other disciplines. This means that it would be worthwhile to consider the possible reaction of the lecturers in other fields of study. Perhaps, the current challenge might affect the other fields of study. For this reason, it would be prudent to consider this possibility when developing the reward system.
While designing the appropriate reward system for the academic staff, the management team should align its goals with the reward system. It should also align it with what it can afford and what other universities offer to their lecturers. On this basis, the university management team should evaluate the best theories that would be applicable to its reward system. It should also evaluate the best model to adopt in developing and implementing its reward system (Malloy, Marinak & Gambrell 2010).
Furthermore, the management team should understand that an effective reward system motivates workers both intrinsically and extrinsically. This means that such a system should motivate workers from the outside as well as from the inside. With regard to the expectancy theory, motivation among employees is only possible if employees understand the relationship between their effort and the outcomes (Armstrong 2012). In addition, the value of the reward should be worth the effort the employees would put into their professions. According to equity theory, employees work hard when the management team treats them equally, and vice versa. Alongside these two theories, the management team should also consider the goal theory. This theory attributes motivation and performance to the existence of specific goals that employees understand as well as participate in setting them (Armstrong 2002).
In relation to the above theories of motivation, this paper proposes that the university management team should treat all lecturers equally. It should also develop specific goals for the lecturers to achieve as well as a bonus system for them. In addition, the management team should try as much as possible to align its salaries scales with the ones from other universities, and include intrinsic motivations in the reward system. The rationale for doing this would be to motivate the lecturers both extrinsically and intrinsically while at the same time, helping the students advance their career aspirations.
With regard to the model, the management team should do the following. First, the management team should define an equitable reward system and communicate it to the lecturers. This reward system should include what the management team expects from the lecturers concerning the performances of the students. Second, it should identify the performance capabilities such as skills and knowledge among the lecturers, and match them with its expectations (Daly & Kleiner 1995). Third, it should develop an attractive bonus system for the lecturers. Fourth, with the help of the lecturers, the management team should set specific challenging tasks for the lecturers to achieve in order to earn bonuses. Fifth, the management team should encourage the lecturers to take up the performance criteria as their own (Caudron 1995). This would help the lecturers work towards achieving the benefits while helping the university advance its goals. Sixth, the management team should develop the necessary mechanisms that would help in measuring performances among the lecturers accurately. This is in relation to the lecturer’s expectations to earn bonuses from their effort. Seventh, the management team should provide positive and timely feedback to the lecturers concerning their performances, and pay them bonuses where applicable (Shields 2007). This would reinforce the performances of the lecturers to the expectations of the management team. Finally, the management team should include some intrinsic motivations such as issuing certificates of achievement to the lecturers, promotions, and holding annual parties among other non-monetary benefits (Schuster 1969). Such a reward system would motivate the academic staff both intrinsically and extrinsically thereby help the university achieve its goals.
The above-proposed reward system discourages the management team from adopting an exclusive reward package because such a reward system would be discriminative. It would also be against the equity theory that proposes for the motivation of employees by treating them equally (Mitchell, Ortiz & Mitchell 1987). If the university adopts an exclusive reward package, then it would discourage lecturers from other disciplines from working hard
Amar, 2001, Managing knowledge workers: unleashing innovation and productivity. Westport, CT, Quorum Books.
Armstrong, M 2002, Employee reward. London, Chartered Inst. of Personnel and Development.
Armstrong, M 2012, Armstrong’s handbook of reward management practice: improving performance through reward. London, Kogan Page.
Caudron, S 1995, The top 20 ways to motivate employees, Industry Week, vol. 244, no. 7, pp. 12-18.
Daly, D & Kleiner, B 1995, How to motivate problem employees, Work-study, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 5-7.
Malloy, J, Marinak, B & Gambrell, L 2010, Essential readings on motivation. Newark, Del, International Reading Association.
Mitchell, D, Ortiz, F & Mitchell, T 1987, Work orientation and job performance: the cultural basis of teaching rewards and incentives. Albany, N.Y., State University of New York Press.
Schuster, J 1969, A spectrum of pay for performance: how to motivate employees, Management of personnel quarterly, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 35-38.
Shields, J 2007, Managing employee performance and reward: concepts, practices, strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.