طراحی الگوی پاسخ گویی جبران خدمات مدیران ارشد دولتی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه لرستان، ایران.

2 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد کرمان، ایران.

چکیده

پژوهش فوق با هدف بررسی تاثیر سطح پاسخگویی بر جبران خدمت مدیران ارشد با توجه به نقش میانجی پاداش احتمالی در بین مدیران سازمان‌های دولتی شهر خرم‌آباد انجام گرفت. روش تحقیق حاضر از نظر ماهیت در زمره تحقیقات توصیفی (میدانی و پیمایشی) قرار داشته و از نظر روش نیز در دسته تحقیقات علمی محسوب می‌گردد. جامعه آماری این پژوهش 50 نفر از مدیران ارشد سازمان‌های دولتی شهر خرم‌آباد است و از روش سرشماری بجای نمونه‌گیری استفاده شده است. الگوریتم تحلیل داده‌ها به روش حداقل مربعات جزئی جهت سنجش روابط بین متغیرهای پژوهش مورد استفاده قرار گرفت. برازش مناسب هر دو بخش الگوریتم داده‌ها نشان‌دهنده قابل قبول بودن پرسشنامه‌ها و ساختار مکنون در سطح شاخص‌ها و سوالات مورد استفاده بود. نتایج تحقیق حاکی از تاثیر مثبت سطوح پاسخگویی بر جبران خدمت مدیران ارشد سازمان‌های دولتی شهر خرم‌آباد است. این امر علی‌رغم تایید تاثیر مستقیم سطوح پاسخگویی بر جبران خدمت مدیران ارشد سبب تایید غیرمستقیم سطوح پاسخگویی بر جبران خدمت مدیران ارشد سازمان‌های دولتی شهر خرم‌آباد شد. تایید نقش میانجی پاداش احتمالی در تقویت رابطه سطوح پاسخگویی و جبران خدمت مدیران ارشد، نیاز به توجه هر چه بیشتر سازمان‌ها به برنامه‌ریزی جهت تقویت متغیر فوق را آشکار می‌سازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Designing a Response Pattern for Compensating Senior Government Services

نویسندگان [English]

  • Reza Sepahvand 1
  • Fatemeh Akbari Pasham 1
  • Alma Faramarzi 2
1 Lorestan University, Iran.
2 Islamic Azad University, Kerman Branch, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of accountability level on senior managers compensation due to the role of mediatory probable rewards among managers of governmental organizations in Khorramabad city. The methodology of the present research is of descriptive (field and survey) nature and is considered as a scientific research category. The statistical population of this research is 50 senior managers of governmental organizations in Khorramabad city and using census method instead of sampling. The data analysis algorithm was used by partial least squares method to measure the relationships between research variables. Appropriate fit for both parts of the data algorithm indicates the acceptability of the questionnaires and the structure at the level of the indicators and questions used. The results of the research indicate that the level of accountability of senior managers of governmental organizations in Khorramabad is compensated. This despite the confirmation of the direct impact of accountability levels on senior management compensation, has indirectly confirmed levels of accountability for redressing senior managers of government agencies in Khorramabad. Confirming the role of the potential reward mediator in enhancing the relationship between levels of accountability and redress for senior executives, reveals the need for organizations to pay more attention to planning to strengthen the above variable.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Accountability Level
  • Compensation
  • Possible rewards
  • Government organization
  1. Armstrong, M., & Murlis, H. (2007). Reward Management: A Handbook of Remuneration Strategy and Practice. London, Kogan Page Limited.
  2. Armstrong, M. (2013). Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. New York, NY: Kogan Page Publishers.
  3. Ayanda O.J., & Sani, A.D. (2011) An Evaluation of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) Practices in Nigerian Universities: The Impact of Ownership Type and Age. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science,s 32, 1-25.
  4. Banker, R.D., Janakiraman, S.N., & Konstans, C. (2011). Balanced scorecard: linking strategy to performance. Financial Executives Research Foundation.
  5. Bao, J., & Wu, A. (2017). Equality and Equity in Compensation. American Economic Review, 78(2), 44–49.
  6. Barringer, B.R., Jones, F.F., & Neubaum, D.O. (2005). A quantitative content analysis of the characteristics of rapid-growth firms and their founders. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 663 - 687.
  7. Belenzon S, & Tsolmon, U. (2015). Market frictions and the competitive advantage of internal labor markets. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1280-1303.
  8. Bryson, A., Pendleton, A., & Whitfield, K. (2013). The Changing Use of Contingent Pay at the Modern British Workplace. National Institute of Economic and Social Research, Discussion Paper No. 319.
  9. Campbell, E.D. (1998). Ethics in Public Services, Ottawa: Carleton university Press,
  10. Cappelen, A.W., Bjorn-Atle R.E., & Sorensen, B.T. (2016). Leadership and incentives. Management Science, 62(7), 1944–1953.
  11. Cornellus, N. (2011). Human Resource Management: A Managerial Perspective, New York, NY: Cengage Learning.
  12. Chen, H.-R. and H.-F. Tseng (2012). Factors that influence acceptance of web-based e-learning systems for the in-service education of junior high school teachers in Taiwan. Evaluation and program planning, 35(3), 398-406.
  13. Danish, Q. D., & Usman, A. (2010). Impact of Reward and Recognition on Job Satisfaction and Motivation: An Empirical Study from Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management, 5 (2), 159-167.
  14. Delery, J.E., & Doty, D.H. (1996) Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management: Tests of Universalistic, Contingency and Configuration Performance Predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 802-835.
  15. Dineen, B. R., & Williamson, I. O. (2012). Screening-oriented recruitment messages: Antecedents and relationships with applicant pool quality. Human Resource Management, 51, 343–360.
  16. Ederer, F., & Manso, G. (2013). Is pay for performance detrimental to innovation?. Management Science, 59(7), 1496–1513.
  17. Eisingerich, A.B., Rubera, G., & Seifert, M. (2010). Managing service innovation and interorganizational relationships for firm performance to commit or diversify?. Journal of Service Research, 11, 344-356.
  18. European Commission (2010). Report on the application by Member States of the EU of the Commission 2009/385/EC Recommendation (2009 Recommendation on directors´ remuneration): COM(2010) 285. Publications Office of the European Union.
  19. European Commission (2017). Shareholders' rights directive Q&A: MEMO/17/592. (14 March 2017). Brussels: European Commission.
  20. Fornell, C. and D. F. Larcker (1981).Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
  21. Gupta, N., & Shaw, J.D. (2014). Employee compensation: The neglected area of HRM research. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), 1-4.
  22. Guest, D. (2011). Human Resource Management and Performance: Still Searching for some Answers. Human Resource Management Journal, 2(1), 3-13.
  23. Gunasekaran, A., Irani, Z., Choy, K.L., Filippi, L., & Papadopoulos, T. (2015). Performance measures and metrics in outsourcing decisions: A review for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 161, 153-166.
  24. Kadhim, A. (2017). Relationship between SHRM and Organizational Performance among Iraqi Oil Companies. Journal of Global Economics, 5(1), 1-12.
  25. DOI: 10.4172/2375-4389.1000241
  26. Korir, I., & Kipkebut, D. (2016). The Effect of Reward Management on Employees Commitment in the Universities in Nakuru County-Kenya. Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(4), 37-48.
  27. Kotnik, P., Sakinç, M.E., Slavec, A., & Guduraš, D. (2017). Executive compensation in Europe: Realized gains from stock-based pay, This project has received funding from the European Union Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation action under grant agreement No 649186
  28. Larkin, I., & Stephen, L. ( 2012). Incentive schemes, sorting, and behavioral biases of employees: Experimental evidence. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 184–214.
  29. Lindström, A. (2016). Top management compensation and firm performance - A matter of context?, Master’s Thesis 30 credits Department of Business Studies Uppsala University Spring Semester of 2016, Date of Submission: 2016-05-27
  30. Mullins, J.L. (2013). Management and organizational Behavior, Pearson Education, Harlow.
  31. Njanja, W., Maina, R., & Njagi, K. (2013). Effect of Reward on Employee Performance: A Case of Kenya Power and Lighting Company Ltd, Nakuru, Kenya. International Journal of Business and Management, 8 (21), 41-49.
  32. Nor Zaini, Z., Kuppusamy, S. & Zaherawati, Z. (2015). Diminishing Obligations of Local Government: Effect on Accountability and Public Trust. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (211), 255-259.
  33. Paul, A.K., & Anantharaman, R.N. (2003). Impact of people management practices on organizational performance: analysis of a causal model. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 1246-1266.
  34. Pink, D. (2010). The puzzle of motivation. Available from: http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
  35. Romzek, B.S. (2000). Dynamics of Public Sector Accountavility in an Era of Reform. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 6(1).
  36. Singh, K. (2005). The effect of human resource practices on firm performance in India. Human Resource Development International, 6, 101-116.
  37. Shahinmehr, B., & Hassani, M. (2015). Modeling the relationship between professional ethics and social responsibility with organizational accountability. Journal of Ethics in Science and Technology, 10(1), 1-11.
  38. Shields, J. (2010). Managing Employee Performance and Reward. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
  39. Spector, B. & Spital, F.C. (2011). The ideology of executive bonuses: an historical Perspective. Journal of Management History, 17(3), 315-331.
  40. Trakulmututa, J. & Chaijareonwattana, B. (2013). Factors Affecting the Achievement of Good Governance in HRM: The Empirical Study of Local Governments in Southern Part of Thailand. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(7), 34-40.
  41. Uen, J.F., & Chien, S.H. (2004). Compensation structure, perceived equity and individual performance of R& D professionals. Journal of American Academy of Business, 4, 401-405.
  42. Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L., & Goode, M. R. (2016). The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314, 1154–1156.
  43. Wetzels, M., G. Odekerken-Schröder and C. Van Oppen (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration." MIS quarterly, 177-195.