管理风格和公平的工资制度(绩效与薪酬).doc

Management Style and FairPaymentTom HusbandProfessor of Manufacturing Organizations,Loughborough University of TechnologyAbstractThis article discusses the relationship between management style within a firm and the procedures used to determine internal wage and salary differentials. At a time when management styles are apparently becoming less authoritarian and paternalistic in favour of greater worker participation there is obviously a danger of firms using payment techniques which are inappropriate to the current management/worker relationship. Some simple models of workers and organization are used to identify four broad styles of management. These styles are then related to the job evaluation and performance rating techniques in common use in British industry today. Some general conclusions are drawn concerning future trends in payment to suit management style.本文主要涉及了一个公司的管理风格和确定内部工资差距使用的程序之间的关系。有时，当管理制度明显非专制化，且更倾向于员工参与时，公司目前使用的对日常管理(人员)的不恰当的支付关系将带给公司极大的危机。有时我们会采用一些简单的员工和管理人员的关系模式来鉴定四种大概的管理风格。今天，在英国的工业生产中，这些风格常被使用于日常的职业评估和绩效评价。对于未来的工资和管理风格关系的走向我得出了一些结论。IntroductionProblems of internal pay structuring have always been of keen interest to both managers and students of British industry. In recent years however the setting of rational and fair pay differentials has taken on a particular significance. Our social and managerial attitudes to criteria for reward are changing fast. The whole question of pay relativities is now seen to be central to the establishment of a just industrial society. Within individual firms managers and employees are questioning the traditional approaches to work structuring and wage payment. There is a distinct move from both sides of industry towards a greater degree of employee consultation and participation in the running of the firm. This trend has brought with it fresh approaches to the analysis of work and the determination of equitable wage and salary differentials.英国工业企业内部的薪酬结构问题长久以来一直是相关管理人员和大量学生兴趣的所在。近年来，设置公平合理的内部薪酬差距管理制度被赋予了极大的意义。关于薪酬标准，社会意识和管理层面的态度一直在迅速的改变。工资关系问题在现在看来是一个工业社会建立的核心。个体企业管理人员和员工都在质疑传统的工作结构构建和工资制度。一个不同于以往的向员工和参与运作产业的双方咨询的移动产业正在建立。这一趋势也带来了工作分析和确定薪酬和福利的公平的差别的新方法。A great many British companies have already applied themselves to solving the dynamic problems of work analysis and reward. The majority are probably only now deciding how best to approach these same problems. It is fair to say that a great deal of confusion and even controversy surrounds the issues involved. In the last decade managers have been deluged with new techniques of pay administration.英国多家公司已经致力于解决工作分析和奖励的动力问题。现在，大部分的公司都在思考如何解决这些雷同却重要的问题。事实上，关于这个问题，一直存在这大量的混乱甚至是纷争。在过去的十几年里，公司管理一直致力于新的薪酬管理技术研究中。All of these techniques are valid when applied under appropriate conditions. The dilemma which has faced managers is to know which of the techniques is relevant to the solution of their particular problems. There have been many sad cases of mismatch between technique and situation.在一定的条件下所有这些技术都是有效可行的。当然，管理人员应当首先熟悉自己所面临的问题，已找到合适有效地解决自身存在的问题的有效手段。因为，有大量令人惋惜的解决方案与问题不符合的案例存在。Managers need an overall company strategy for work analysis and pay. The integration of techniques into a total package of wage and salary administration must reflect the management style employed in the company, as well as recognize the many constraints put on managerial control.管理人员需要有一个全局性的公司工作管理分析和薪酬支付观念。公司管理风格和薪酬支付方式需要在一定条件下高度整合，并且放宽管理制度的约束条件。Many companies are now facing up to situations where management styles are altering and technological and other influences are changing fast. The company pay strategy has to mirror these changes if it is to remain effective.许多公司正在面临管理风格的迅速改变以及其他影响因素的巨变。针对该种情况，公司的薪酬管理策略也必须随之改变来保持其工资制度的有效性。Ideally the internal payment structure should reflect the organization structure (and hence the structure of responsibility carried across job hierarchy). However there is no single ideal structure of organization and consequently there can be no single ideal structure of pay. Each firm has a range of needs which are met or partially met by the measures taken by management. We can begin the argument by examining the management styles associated with the needs of the employee/ manager relationships - the so-called psychological contract.理想情况下，内部薪酬结构应该反映组织结构（从而进行跨岗位责任结构）。但是没有一个公司有单一理想的组织结构，因此，相对的，不可能有单一的理想的薪酬结构。每个企业都有一系列的要求，符合或通过采取管理措施部分满足了的需求范围。我们可以从参数的研究与员工/经理的关系-也就是所谓的“心理契约“来探讨相关问题。Management Styles and the Psychological Contract 管理风格和心理契约Obviously the management style used in fulfilling the psychological contract reflects the way in which managers in the company expect employees to behave. Some managerial teams expect their employees to simply have what is known as a calculative involvement with the company. They are expected to do what is required by the goal-setters (the management team) and no more. The contract is fulfilled by paying sufficient wages or salaries to motivate the employees to meet the goals set by the managers. Many small family firms operate this management style and there are possibly a great many large companies too. It is convenient to label this type of management view of the organization as goal oriented. In the extreme such managers might perceive only a single goal (profit ratio, market share, etc) without requiring the employees to have any identification or moral involvement with that goal. A totally different conceptual model of the organization allows for the achievement of a whole range of needs by the organization.很显然,用于确保心理契约的管理风格,反映在公司管理者对员工行为的期望。一些管理团队期望他们的员工只有所谓的“计算”参与。他们被期望去完成那些由管理团队所设定的事情,其它的一切免谈。管理者通过履行合同支付足够的工资或薪水去激励员工而达到所定的目标。许多小型家族企业都在实行这一管理和操作模式，当然许多大公司也一样。我们可以简单的称这种类型的管理的观点为目标导向型管理模式。在这样的管理模式下，管理人员可能感觉只有一个简单的目标(利润比例、市场占有率等)而不需要的员工有任何判断力或“道德参与这一目标。该组织的一个完全不同的概念模型允许组织所需要的全方位的成就。Managers who conceive of their companies in this fashion see the need for balancing the system of needs. Employees (and especially other, junior managers) are perceived as people whose actions should influence the entire organization not just their own department or subsystem of, for example, production control or purchasing or marketing, etc. The view held here is that it is no good to have nine tenths of the companys needs being met and the other tenth ignored. It is a systems approach and is a model which is apparent in the management philosophy of our larger and more progressive industrial companies.公司管理人员以这种方式看到系统需求平衡的必要性。员工(特别是对其他,初级管理人员)的行为将影响整个组织而不只是他们自己的部门或子系统,例如,生产控制或采购或销售等。所以，刚刚说到的观点是十分不好的，并且十个公司中九个面临这样的问题，另一个则根本忽略不管。这是一个“系统”的做法,是一个模型,该模型很明显是可以构建更大更好的实业公司的市场经营理念。Between these two polar models of organization there is obviously scope for many other concepts. A pluralistic model, for example would allow for different constituent parts of the organization to have their own separate goals.这两种极性的组织模式之间存在明显存在许多其他的概念。即，多元模式，例如允许的组织成分的不同部位有自己单独的目标。The models that managers hold of men as distinct from the goals of the company are described in a massive literature of organizational psychology. It is possible in this area also to establish extreme, polar concepts. One extreme would be the assumption that man is a rational-economic animal. Because of this a manager holding such a view might use McGregors well-known Theory X approach to his subordinate. McGregor1 points out that rational-economic man assumptions imply that man is lazy by nature and is motivated primarily by financial incentives. The employee is seen to need direction and control so that he will work towards the organizations goals. He is seen to be unambitious and reluctant to take responsibility. The assumptions associated with Theory X are, of course, built into the foundations of the Classical organization theories. The employee, in short, is seen to react to his environment.管理者持有与公司截然不同的目标的模型是在组织心理学的大量文献中描述的模型。在这方面它也有可能建立极端极性的概念。一个极端是假设人是理性的经济动物。因为这一个经理持有这种观点可能会用麦克格雷戈著名的X理论方法对他的下属。麦克格雷戈指出“理性经济人”假设意味着人是懒惰的性质，做事的动机主要出于财政奖励。员工被认为需要指导和控制，他将努力实现组织的目标。他被认为是没有野心，不愿意承担责任。用X理论相关的假设是，当然，建成了古典组织理论的基础。总之，员工，看到他的环境做出的反应。The model of man seen to be at the opposite from the reactive, Theory X man is McGregors Theory Y approach. Assumptions on which Theory Y are based include the fact that most men do not dislike work, they seek a challenge from the work environment and in fact welcome the opportunity to achieve a moral involvement with the organization. Under appropriate conditions the employee, says Theory Y, will seek out responsibility and is capable of imagination, ingenuity and creativity. 人看作是在从反应相反的模型，X理论的人是麦克格雷戈的Y理论方法。假设，Y理论基础包括这样一个事实：大多数人不讨厌工作，他们寻求挑战的工作环境，事实上欢迎有机会实现与组织的“道德”的参与。在适当的条件下的员工说，Y理论，将寻求责任和能够想象，别出心裁的创意。There have been several attempts to classify the various models of man and organization, a notable example being the typology developed by Etzioni2. For the purpose of this present discussion, however, the simple model constructed by Limerick3 to show the type of management style implied by managements assumptions about men and organization seems appropriate. The model takes the form of the matrix shown in Figure 1 below:有人与组织的各种模型进行了几次尝试，一个明显的例子是由etzioni2类型。然而，这种讨论，目的，简单的模型limerick3显示似乎是管理风格的人和组织管理的假设的适当的类型。该模型将在下面的图1所示的矩阵形式：Reactive Man反映人士Self-Active Man自我反映人士GoalOrganization目标组织AuthoritarianManagement独裁管理ConsultativeManagement咨询管理SystemOrganization体系组织PaternalisticManagement家长式管理ParticipativeManagement参与式管理Figure 1 The Limerick Matrix of Management Styles 利默里克管理风格矩阵The matrix suggests that if management holds Theory X (reactive man) assumptions and sees the organization as being single goal orientated, the style implied is authoritarian. At the other extreme, should the assumptions be of Theory Y nature and the organization be seen as systems orientated, the model implies that the strategy is participative. It must be borne in mind, of course, that this classification represents pure types of organization which probably do not exist as such in practice. It is meant to be a relative model which shows only the extreme assumptions and implied strategies. It is, however, very important to be able to put the problem ofdiffering styles into some perspective.矩阵指出，如果持有X理论管理（反应的人）的假设，并认为是一个目标导向的组织，是独裁的风格暗示。在另一个极端，如果是Y理论假设的性质和组织被看作是系统导向，模型意味着这一战略是参与。我们必须牢记，当然，这种分类代表纯粹类型的组织可能在实践中不存在这样。它意味着是一个相对的模式，只显示了极端的假设和隐含的战略。但它是非常重要的是能够把问题各自不同的一些观点风格。Equitable Payment 公平的薪酬结构The four styles of management proposed in the model can be considered with special reference to problems of equitable payment. Authoritarian management is typified by the proposals of the Classical management theorists (eg Fayol,Urwick, Gulick). The organization is managed along the universal principles of planning, organizing, motivating and controlling and the structure is pyramidal with great emphasis on line authority. There is rigid specialization and departmentalization. Participation by non-management in meeting the organizations goal is severely restricted.管理模型中提出的四种风格可考虑到公平报酬问题特别参考。独裁的管理是典型的古典管理理论的建议（如法约尔，厄威克，Gulick）。该组织是按规划管理的普遍原则，激励和控制结构的锥体与在线权威重点。有严格的专业化和部门化。为满足组织的目标，严格限制的非参与管理。In paternalistic management the systems needs of the organization must be met by those employees who are not seen to be reactive. Thus, for example, some large, sophisticated industrial organizations typically perceive themselves to have systems of needs, the non-managers and even junior management are seen as reactive while the senior management team is often assumed to consist of self-active men. Here the senior managers assume that they have to meet their subordinates needs for them; say by providing preferential pension schemes and welfare benefits and cheap canteens, sometimes with little consultation with the employees involved. A paternalistic organization is also typified by a pyramidal structure and an emphasis on line authority. Paternalism is improved over the authoritarian strategy in that employees are often allowed to present alternatives for action in non-task activities. Many British concerns are run on clearly paternalistic lines. There are several well-known, large organizations (typically the major employers in their respective communities) which adopt a cradle to grave, protective attitude to their employees. In the past such firms tended to discourage trade union representation believing that a company union or association could better meet the needs of their workpeople.在家长式管理系统需求的组织必须符合的雇员都不能视为反应的情况。因此，例如，一些大型的，复杂的工业组织通常认为自己有“系统”的需求，非管理人员和初级管理被视为五反应，而高级管理团队通常被认为是自我活动的人。这里的高级管理人员认为他们必须满足下属的需要为他们提供优惠；通过提供养老金、福利和廉价的食堂，有时与员工很少协商。家长式的组织是典型的金字塔式的结构和对权威的重点。家长制相对于独裁的改变是在员工通常允许在非工作活动的行动提出替代方案，威权主义策略的改进。英国的许多问题都是运行在明确家长式的线上。有几个著名的，大的组织（通常是在各自的社区的主要雇主）采用“从摇篮到坟墓”，对员工的保护态度。在过去，这些公司往往阻碍工会代表表态，企业联盟或协会能更好地满足他们的员工的需要。In a paternalistic company one would expect the pay level for shop floor and clerical workers to be relatively low, the employees being compensated by superior welfare benefits and greater job security in general. In an authoritarian firm the pay levels in the lower job grades could be expected to be slightly higher (for the same economic and technological conditions) than in the paternalistic company. In fact, however, some of the larger well established paternalistic concerns often have a reputation for paying basic wages and salaries above the norm.在家长式的公司车间和文书人员的薪酬水平是相对较低，但是会以提供精良的福利和工作保障为雇员提供补偿。与一个独裁式的公司相比，在较低的工作职系上的薪酬水平可能会预计将略高于的家长式公司（对于同样的经济和技术条件）。但实际上，较大的一些以家长式建立的公司经常会支付基本工资及以上的工资的薪金。A consultative management strategy implies that man is seen as self-active but requires to be directed so that his needs are integrated with the goal of the organization. The managers functions are, as in the authoritarian strategy, to plan, organize, motivate and control but in this case the process is carried out in such a way that maximum autonomy for employees is allowed without endangering the goal of the organization. The strategy implies a pyramidal structure with only a limited recognition of the non-managers right to be heard. Participation is allowed to the extent that employees can present alternatives for action in task activities. The style of management is man-to-man but the strategy is also characterized by the use of joint consultative conferences and the like.咨询式管理策略意味着，人被视为自我主动反应，但需要向别人的指示，使他的需要与该组织的目标结合起来。管理者的职能，如同在专制的战略，计划，组织，激励和控制，但在这种情况下，这个过程是在一种员工的自主性不危害组织目标的方式下进行的。该策略意味着一个金字塔结构只能识别有限的非管理人员被听到。参与是允许在一定程度上，员工可以在任务活动的行动方案。管理风格：人但战略特点的共同协商会议的使用等。Participative management assumes that self-active man will make a responsible contribution to the achievement of the systems needs. The managers function is to act as a monitor of the system needs and to create conditions in which they can be met. This strategy implies a fluid, organic structure and recognizes both formal, line authority and the authority of non-executives as a result of their personal expertise. Group work is encouraged and, in participating, employees are allowed to present and evaluate alternative courses of action.参与管理假设自我主动的人会对系统的需求，实现一个负责任的贡献。管理者的职能是作为系统需要一个监视器和创造，就可以得到满足的条件。这个策略意味着流体，有机结构识别形式，线的权威和非主管当局由于其个人专长。小组的工作是鼓励，参与，员工可以提出和评估行动的替代课程。In the consultative and participative strategies, then, employees are encouraged to view the organization as a unitary system. Because of this, one would expect to find the pay of low level jobs being compared, formally, to that of the higher-level jobs. In short, one could expect an approach to an all-company job evaluated pay structure since employees are concerned more with the company as a whole compared with their counterparts in companies managed by the first two strategies outlined above.在协商和参与的策略，然后，鼓励员工认为组织作为一个单一的系统。正因为如此，人们会期望找到低水平工作的薪酬水平进行比较，正式到更高级别的工作。总之，人能想到一种方法的一个公司所有的工作评估，薪酬结构由于员工更关注整个公司与他们的同行在前两种策略管理公司相比。Participation and Payment 参与与薪酬结构There appears to be some movement towards greater involvement of all employees in the management of British firms. The mood of the day suggests that authoritarian management is fast becoming unacceptable to employees and that even paternalism is unwelcome.在英国似乎有员工参与度提高的公司管理趋势。并且调查显示，独裁式管理正迅速成为员工所不能接受的，不受欢迎的家长式作风。At least one large British corporation has developed work designs which eliminate the need for the traditional foreman.The workers operate in teams which decide, for themselves,on the allocation of work duties, shift rota details, holiday arrangement details and the like. More importantly the workers participate, in the true sense, in writing the teams job description and consequent pay grade. Obviously this type of job design and organizational thinking greatly affects a companys philosophy of work and reward. If the apparent trend towards greater participation continues we can therefore expect to see a greater emphasis on the workers knowledge authority. The managerial style used by a company is clearly important in deciding the most appropriate forms of work analysis and reward. It is obviously wrong for a company which is, say, essentially paternalistic to install pay systems which depend on true participation for their effectiveness. Yet this is not at all unusual.至少有一个大的英国公司开发设计，消除传统的工头的需要。操作工人在团队的决定，为自己，对工作职责的分配，转移旋转的细节，细节等假期安排。更重要的是，工人的参与，在真正意义上，在写作团队的工作描述和相应的工资等级。显然，这种类型的工作设计和组织思想极大地影响了工作和奖励的公司哲学。如果明显的趋势走向更大的参与继续我们可以期望看到一个更强调工人的知识的权威。公司用的管理风格在决定工作分析和奖励最合适的形式显然是很重要的。这显然是错误的一个公司，基本上说，家长式的安装要取决于他们真正参与系统的有效性。然而，这并不是在所有不寻常的If there really is a strong move towards consultative and participative management styles across British industry what are the implications for payment techniques in the future? Managers usually apply two types of technique - one, job evaluation, to provide a ranking of job value in terms of basic wages or salaries and, two, merit rating (or performance appraisal, or incentive systems) to provide a means of rewarding individual employee effort and achievement.如果真的存在对协商和参与式管理风格在英国产业是未来支付技术的影响强的行动？管理者通常采用两种类型的技术，工作评价，提供基本工资或薪金方面排名工作的价值，二，考绩（或绩效考核，激励系统）提供奖励员工的努力和成绩的一种手段。Job evaluation techniques which yield a single, comp