Should Firms Consider Employee Input in Reward System Design? The Effect of Participation on Market Orientation and New Product Performance

Will increasing employee participation in reward decisions increase new product performance by first increasing a firm's level of market orientation? Literature offers limited insight to the effects of listening to employees regarding reward system design and whether this may influence market orientation implementation and new product performance. This paper provides research to fill the gap by examining the relationship between participation‐based reward systems, market orientation, and new product performance. Based on expectancy theory, a conceptual model was developed suggesting that participation‐based rewards will increase market orientation by considering employees' desires regarding performance rewards. To test the model, a mixed method was used to collect data. First, in‐depth interviews were conducted with managers from 11 different firms to verify the proposed model. Then a multi‐industry sample of managers from 290 firms was surveyed to maximize generalizability of the results. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling techniques to simultaneously fit the measurement and structural models. The findings show that market orientation significantly impacts objective new product performance and mediates the relationship between participation‐based rewards and objective new product performance. Participation‐based rewards positively affect market orientation but surprisingly affect new product performance negatively, while positively moderating the relationship between market orientation and new product performance. The results suggest that managers should include employee input in designing reward systems. However, managers should also be careful of how much input they allow employees in determining their rewards and goals as more input will improve market orientation or responding to information collected by, and disseminated throughout the firm, and that, in turn, will improve some types of new product performance. However, the direct effect of employee input can decrease new product performance suggesting that there may be a trade‐off between various success measures of new products developed and introduced by the firm.     

The Role of Salary and Incentives in the New Product Function

It seems reasonable to expect that a company's reward systems would recognize the importance of the new product function. It also seems reasonable that those systems should take into account the importance of cross-functional teams. Unfortunately, current reality does not meet those reasonable expectations. Laurence P. Feldman presents the results of a 1994 PDMA membership survey on the compensation of new product professionals. This study updates and extends the information collected in his 1990 PDMA survey, and thus meets four objectives: tracking changes in compensation levels since the 1990 survey; assessing the effects of various factors on compensation; examining the structure of non-salary financial incentives; and obtaining information on the extent and types of nonfinancial incentives used with cross-functional teams. The survey results indicate that compensation of new product professionals increased by 9.6% between 1989 and 1993. This compares unfavorably with a Labor Department benchmark of 14.7%. Survey findings indicate that the compensation of technical or scientific people does not differ significantly from that of marketing personnel. A firm's industry classification has a greater influence on compensation level than does a person's role in the new products process. Even more important are such factors as number of people supervised, length of time with the firm, and education level. Respondents indicate that performance-based financial incentives play a minor role in overall compensation. Such incentives gain importance as you move up the ranks of the organization, accounting for slightly more than 20% of total compensation at the vice presidential level. Despite the benefits of using cross-functional teams, compensation programs typically do not reward team efforts. Less than 20% of the respondents who served on such teams reported that any portion of their compensation was directly attributable to their team effort. In most cases, the new product professional's performance is evaluated by a functional manager rather than the team leader or project leader. In place of financial rewards for contributions to a team effort, companies often use nonfinancial rewards such as plaques, hoping to minimize the effect of possible errors in judging performance.     

The moderating effect of control systems on the relationship between commission and salesperson intrinsic motivation in a customer oriented environment

Using a social psychology theory, Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET), the authors show how commission compensation can be viewed as a sales performance contingent reward and the extent of its use to reward performance, coupled with a sales control system, impacts salesperson intrinsic motivation in a relationship selling environment. In essence, the sales control mechanisms modify the impact of the commission based on whether it is perceived as controlling or informative. This is empirically tested using a sample of business-to-business salespeople. Partial support for three hypothesized relationships is shown providing preliminary evidence that CET is a way to study the integration of commission compensation rewards, sales control systems, and motivational impact. Implications of the findings for theory and for managers are considered, along with suggested directions for future research.     

Method for identifying strategic objectives in strategy maps

This paper describes a simple tool for identifying strategic objectives as part of the design of strategy maps, based on the balanced scorecard, and meant to be used in organisations to establish performance indicators. To design the tool, a number of companies that implemented the balanced scorecard were analysed, in order to obtain their methodologies to create strategy maps. Three types of methods were found, different from each other in the way the strategic objectives are defined. By studying the benefits and drawbacks of the three methods, a simple, method was obtained. Basically, the method identifies general and specific strategic objectives and uses a modified SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis. This paper also makes an analysis of the type of strategic objectives that the studied companies defined as part of the balanced scorecard implementation process.     

Structural and relational influences on the role of reward interdependence in product innovation

This study examines the relationship between reward interdependence, or the extent to which managers' rewards are tied to the performance of colleagues in other functions, and product innovation. It also considers how structural and relational features of the organizational context might moderate this relationship. Our analysis of a sample of Canadian‐based firms reveals a positive relationship between reward interdependence and product innovation that is invigorated at higher levels of job rotation, social interaction, and interactional fairness, but we find no evidence of a moderating effect of decision autonomy. Consistent with a systems approach to organizational contingencies, we also find that the reward interdependence–product innovation relationship is stronger when the organization's context comes closer to an ‘ideal’ holistic configuration that is most conducive to knowledge exchange within the organization, with a more prominent role played by the relational sub‐context (social interaction and interactional fairness) than the structural sub‐context (job rotation and decision autonomy). The findings have important implications for innovation research as they shed light on how the extent to which individual rewards are tied to collective performance can be channeled to enhance innovation pursuits.     

The Roles of Sustainability Orientation and Market Knowledge Competence in New Product Development Success

Firms’ sustainability orientation (SO) is widely understood as a strategic resource, which can lead to competitive advantage and superior (financial) performance. While recent empirical evidence suggests a moderate and positive relationship between SO and financial performance on a corporate level, little is understood about the influence of SO on new product development (NPD) success. Building on the natural‐resource‐based view (NRBV) of the firm, we hypothesize that firms’ SO positively influences NPD success, because of efficiency gains and differentiation advantages. However, scholars have also argued that the win–win paradigm postulated by NRBV might not always hold because NPD managers might find it difficult to balance sustainability objectives with the needs of their customer and the competitive dynamics in their markets. It is, therefore, proposed that market knowledge competence (MKC) is an important capability, which helps firms to balance social and ecological objectives with economic goals such as profitability and market share. Using data from 343 international firms from 24 countries that was collected by the Product Development and Management Association, structural equation modeling results suggest that (1) SO positively influences NPD and that (2) this relationship is partially mediated by firms’ market knowledge capabilities. The findings suggest that strategic‐level SO and MKC are complementary in that they help in balancing trade‐offs between sustainaility objectives and profitability goals. In this way, the study contributes to a better understanding of how critical NPD practices can help managers to translate firms’ SO into NPD success. The article concludes by highlighting implications for product innovation managers.     

Upper management control of new product development projects and project performance

While some degree of freedom and flexibility is an essential ingredient to productive cross‐functional NPD teams, upper‐managers are faced with the challenge of instituting effective control mechanisms which head projects in the right strategic direction, monitor progress toward organizational and project goals, and allow for adjustments in the project if necessary. But too much or the wrong type of control may constrain the team's creativity, impede their progress, and injure their ultimate performance. Therefore, this study examines formal and interactive control mechanisms available to upper‐managers in controlling new product development (NPD) projects, and the relationship between these mechanisms and NPD project performance. Formal output and process controls are examined which consist of the setting and monitoring of outcomes, such as goals, schedule and budgets, and of processes and procedures, respectively. This study also looks at how the effectiveness of these control mechanisms may be contingent upon the degree of innovativeness in the project and the degree to which the project is part of a broad product program. In addition, the use of formal rewards for achieving team performance as opposed to rewards for individual achievement is investigated. Lastly, interactive controls are examined which consist of upper‐managers interacting directly with project members in the development of strategy and operational goals and procedures prior to the start of the project, and upper‐managers intervening in project decision‐making. Questionnaire data are collected on 95 projects across a variety of industries. The findings suggest that while NPD projects teams need some level of strategic direction concerning the objectives to be accomplished and the procedures to be followed, upper‐level managers can exert too much control. In particular, the findings showed a negative association between the use of upper manager‐imposed process controls and project performance. The findings also indicated that the degree to which upper‐managers intervened in project‐level decisions during the project was negatively related to project performance. However, the results showed support for the notion that early and interactive decision‐making on control mechanisms is important for effective projects. In particular, early team member and upper‐management involvement in the setting of operational controls, such as goals and procedures for monitoring and evaluating the project, was positively associated with project performance. This study provides additional insight into our understanding of upper‐management support in new product development. The study suggests that upper‐managers can over control with the wrong type of controls, and suggests effective ways of implementing participative and interactive control mechanisms.     

Raising quality consciousness among Chinese manufacturing personnel: Testing the effectiveness of performance management tools

This study draws upon the strategic management control literature, goal-setting, and expectancy theory to address the management of quality in Chinese manufacturing operations. Operating in a transition economy, Chinese managers face specific challenges in adapting management strategies and control systems. Using causal modeling, we examine the implementation of quality strategies through management control and reward systems in 38 manufacturing firms operating in the Pearl River Delta, examining the effects of company size. The results indicate that for larger firms, significant linkages were found between reward systems based on quality outcomes and quality feedback, and in turn, quality feedback was significantly linked to both quality goals and a strategic focus on quality. However, for smaller firms, while significant relationships exist between reward systems based on quality outcomes and the provision of quality goals and feedback, no significant linkages were found between the implementation of management control systems and a strategic focus on quality. This study emphasizes the need to develop more robust theories to address the manufacturing environments of transition economies such as China, as well as the need for additional field research on indigenous firms in Asia.     

Strategic reward systems: a contingency model of pay system design

A limited number of studies have addressed the idea of ‘strategic’ reward systems—the matching of compensation systems to a firm's strategy. Prior research on this topic has been confined to U.S. firms, however, and a number of key questions remain unanswered. Using a sample of 917 employees from two large Swiss financial institutions, we found that pay systems are linked with divisional strategic orientation, but in a different form than prior studies. Additionally, we identify hierarchical position as an important variable in the tailoring of reward systems. Hierarchy has a significant main effect on pay plan design, and an interactive effect with strategic orientation. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Goal Multiplicity and Innovation: How Social and Economic Goals Affect Open Innovation and Innovation Performance

Integrating insights from the strategic goal literature and the knowledge‐based view of the firm, this article proposes that the pursuit of social and economic strategic goals by commercial firms affects their innovation performance through different knowledge sourcing activities. The strategic goals, knowledge sourcing practices, and innovation performance of 1257 Belgian firms are investigated. Results show that both social and economic strategic goals are associated with the use of external information sources, but only the pursuit of social goals inspires firms to engage in external collaboration. No evidence is found of an inherent conflict between social and economic strategic goals. Instead, the two types of goals are independent of each other, that is, an emphasis on social goals does not preclude an emphasis on economic goals and vice versa. Moreover, firms’ external knowledge sourcing and innovation performance benefit most when strongly held social goals align with strongly held economic goals. These findings offer new insight into the nature and the effects of goal multiplicity among commercial firms. They open up a new perspective on the potential positive effects of the joint pursuit of social and economic strategic goals instead of seeing them as inherently conflicting, as past research has typically done. We illustrate how social strategic goals can deliver unique benefits to a firm, independently of and in addition to economic strategic goals. Our findings also contribute to the open innovation literature by revealing strategic goals as a driver of firms’ knowledge sourcing practices. Our findings suggest that solely emphasizing economic goals may be one reason why firms struggle to implement open innovation practices and do not reap their full benefits. The practical implications of our research are discussed.     

The strategic value of CEO external directorate networks: implications for CEO compensation

This study examines the relationship between CEO external directorate networks and CEO compensation. Drawing on previous research showing a link between executives' external networks, firm strategy, and performance, the study argues that executive external networks are strategically valuable to firms; thus, they should be reflected in executive compensation. The study further examines whether firm diversification, with its elevated demand for strategic resources, moderates the relationship between CEO external directorate networks and pay. Hypotheses are tested using a sample of 460 Fortune 1000 firms. Analyses reveal that the rewards to CEO external directorate networks are contingent upon the firm's level of diversification. Implications for future research and practice are discussed. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The frequency of monetary compensation for salesmen

Sales managers have recognized that money is the primary means for motivating salespeople. Although much has been written about compensation plans, the focus of these efforts has been on objectives, type of plan, and size of reward. Little emphasis, however, has been directed to the frequency with which salespeople actually receive compensation. Research from nonmanagerial disciplines suggests the use of different schedules of compensation may positively affect sales-force motivation. The article outlines alternative compensation schedules and discusses the potential implications on sales-force productivity.     

Antecedents and Consequences of Cross-Functional Cooperation: A Comparison of R&D, Manufacturing, and Marketing Perspectives

By breaking down the walls among the R&D, manufacturing, and marketing functions, techniques such as concurrent engineering and quality function deployment can pave the way to more effective new product development (NPD). Recognizing the benefits of such cross-functional efforts, practitioners and researchers have examined the interrelationships among various groups in the NPD process, paying particularly close attention to the R&D–marketing interface. However, manufacturing also plays an important role in NPD. Consequently, any thorough exploration of the relationship between cross-functional cooperation and NPD success must consider manufacturing's perspective. X. Michael Song, Mitzi M. Montoya-Weiss, and Jeffrey B. Schmidt provide such a balanced perspective in a study of cross-functional cooperation during NPD in Mexican high-tech firms. Notwithstanding the differing functional goals, objectives, and reward systems present in R&D, manufacturing and marketing, they hypothesize that all three functions recognize that successful NPD requires crossfunctional cooperation. In particular, they expect that representatives of these three functional groups will share similar perceptions, regarding both the drivers and the consequences of cross-functional cooperation. The survey results support the hypothesis that R&D, manufacturing, and marketing professionals share the same perceptions, regarding the drivers and the consequences of cross-functional cooperation. Respondents from all three groups view internal facilitators as the drivers of cross-functional cooperation. In other words, regardless of their functional area, the survey respondents believe that the strongest, most direct effects on cross-functional cooperation and NPD performance come from a firm's evaluation criteria, reward structures, and management expectations. Respondents perceive these internal facilitators as having a greater effect on cross-functional cooperation than that of external forces such as market competitiveness and technological change. In fact, contrary to expectations, the respondents do not view these external forces as having a significant effect on cross-functional cooperation or NPD performance. And contrary to persistent reports about friction between technical and nontechnical personnel, all three groups perceive a strong, positive relationship between cross-functional communication and NPD performance.     

PDMA Research on New Product Development Practices: Updating Trends and Benchmarking Best Practices

Product development professionals may have the feeling that yet another buzzword or magic bullet always lurks just around the corner. However, researchers have devoted considerable effort to helping practioners determine which tools, techniques, and methods really do offer a competitive edge. Starting 30 years ago, research efforts have aimed at understanding NPD practices and identifying those which are deemed “best practices.” During the past five years, pursuit of this goal has produced numerous privately available reports and two research efforts sponsored by the PDMA. Abbie Griffin summarizes the results of research efforts undertaken during the past five years and presents findings from the most recent PDMA survey on NPD best practices. This survey, conducted slightly more than five years after PDMA's first best-practices survey, updates trends in processes, organizations, and outcomes for NPD in the U.S., and determines which practices are more commonly associated with firms that are more successsful in developing new products. The survey has the following objectives: determining the current status of NPD practices and performance; understanding how product development has changed from five years ago; determining whether NPD practice and performance differ across industry segments; and, investigating process and product development tools that differentiate product development success. The survey findings indicate that NPD processes continue to evolve and become more sophisticated. NPD changes continually on multiple fronts, and firms that fail to keep their NPD practices up to date will suffer an increasingly marked competitive disadvantage. Interestingly, although more than half of the respondents use a cross-functional stage-gate process for NPD, more than one-third of all firms in the study still use no formal process for managing NPD. The findings suggest that firms are not adequately handling the issue of team-based rewards. Project-completion dinners are for the most frequently used NPD reward; they are also the only reward used more by best-practice firms than by the rest of the respondents. The best-practice firms participating in the study do not use financial rewards for NPD. Compared to the other firms in the study, best-practice firms use more multifunctional teams, are more likely to measure NPD processes and outcomes, and expect more from their NPD programs.     

The impact of formalized strategic planning on financial performance in small organizations

The relationship between formality of planning procedures and financial performance was examined for a sample of small U.S. banks. Small banks without formal planning systems performed equally with small, formal planners. Regardless of formality, each set of banks placed equal emphasis on all aspects of strategic decision-making except formalized goals and objectives. Results suggest that managers responsible for strategic planning activity in smaller organizations do not appear to benefit from a highly formalized planning process, extensive written documentation, or the use of mission and goal identification as the beginning of a strategic planning process.     

The Wage Premium for Job Seniority During the 1980s and Early 1990s

In this article I use Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) data to study whether the rewards for job tenure have fallen since the early 1980s. An upward-sloping seniority-wage profile is generally thought to be an important dimension of compensation during a career. However, recent interest in the incidence of layoffs and changes in the structure of firms gives rise to the possibility that employment contracts are less often being structured to reward tenure or that such contracts are more difficult to honor. Using a two-stage estimator to attempt to control unmeasured individual and job match effects on wages, I find some evidence that the wage premium paid to senior workers has declined moderately. However, I find that these results are mildly sensitive to alternative methods of handling the relatively noisy PSID tenure data.     

Understanding the spillover effects of channel reward on observers' commitment: The mediating role of envy

A manufacturer-initiated reward event not only influences the awarded distributor but also alters the behaviors of the unrewarded distributors in the distribution network (i.e., observers). Going beyond a bilateral view of reward, this article examines the spillover effects of rewards on observers. Specifically, taking distributive fairness, procedural fairness, and the magnitude of the reward into consideration, this study postulates that these three aspects of the reward affect observers' level of commitment to the manufacturer through their malicious or benign envy of the awarded recipient. These hypotheses are tested with a survey of 204 distributors from multiple industries in China. The results reveal that distributive fairness of the reward strengthens observers' commitment by decreasing their malicious envy and increasing their benign envy and that procedural fairness and the magnitude of the reward enhance their commitment by increasing their benign envy. We also summarize the theoretical and practical implications about the findings.     

New Product Portfolio Management: Practices and Performance

Effective portfolio management is vital to successful product innovation. Portfolio management is about making strategic choices—which markets, products, and technologies our business will invest in. It is about resource allocation—how you will spend your scarce engineering, R&D, and marketing resources. It focuses on project selection—on which new product or development projects you choose from the many opportunities you face. And it deals with balance—having the right balance between numbers of projects you do and the resources or capabilities you have available. In this article, the authors reveal the findings of their extensive study of portfolio management in industry. This study, the first of its kind, reports the portfolio management practices and performance of 205 U.S. companies. Its overall objective was to gain insights into what portfolio methods companies use, whether they are satisfied with them, the performance results they achieve with the different approaches, and suggestions for others who are considering implementing portfolio management. The research first assesses management's satisfaction with portfolio methods they employ and notes that some firms face major problems in portfolio management. Next, businesses are grouped or clustered into four groups according to management's view of portfolio management: Cowboys, Crossroads, Duds, and Benchmark businesses. The research first assesses management's satisfaction with portfolio methods they employ and notes that some firms face major problems in portfolio management. Next, businesses are grouped or clustered into four groups according to management's view of portfolio management: Cowboys, Crossroads, Duds, and Benchmark businesses. Various performance metrics are used to gauge the performance of the business's portfolio. The results reveal major differences between the best and the worst. Benchmark businesses are the top performers. Their new product portfolios consistently score the best in terms of performance—high-value projects, aligned with the business's strategy, the right balance of projects, and the right number of projects. The authors take a closer look at these benchmark businesses to determine what distinguishes their projects from the rest. Benchmark businesses employ a much more formal, explicit method to managing their portfolio of projects. They rely on clear, well-defined portfolio procedures, they consistently apply their portfolio method to all projects, and management buys into the approach. The relative popularity of various portfolio methods—from financial methods to strategic approaches, bubble diagrams, and scoring approaches—are investigated. Not surprisingly, financial approaches are the most popular and dominate the portfolio decision. But what is surprising is the dubious results achieved via financial approaches. Again, benchmark businesses stand out from the rest: they place less emphasis on financial approaches and more on strategic methods, and they tend to use multiple methods more so than the rest. Strategic methods, along with scoring approaches, yield the best portfolios; financial methods yield poorer portfolio results. The authors provide a number of recommendations and suggestions for anyone setting out to implement portfolio management in their business.     

Microcomputer purchase criteria across industries

When organizational decision makers are examining the options they have as far as the microcomputer purchase process is concerned, they follow certain steps to insure the compatibility of their information systems plan with the strategic mission and goals of the firm. This article examines the factor of product/supplier attribute importance and tests for significant relationships between attribute importance and the characteristics of the purchasing organization, namely firm size, level of computer expertise, and the type of industry in which the firm competes.     

Effort rewarding incentive mechanisms for public enterprise managers

Management incentive schemes leading to welfare optimal pricing and efficient production of public enterprises have so far been mainly concerned with the information advantages that public enterprise managers hold over their supervising government or central planning agency. Managers under these schemes are induced to improve their firm's performance in adjustment processes which in the limit lead to optimal firm decisions. Such managers are supposed to be income maximizers disregarding any personal effort which could influence their performance and utility. In this paper I show that two incentive schemes recently proposed by Tam (1981) and Finsinger and Vogelsang (1982) can also help to induce managers to provide an optimal level of effort. Here effort is assumed to reduce managers' utility and the firm's costs. The result depends crucially on myopic managerial utility maximization. Once managers maximize the discounted value of future utility levels they will deviate from the optimal behavior. Under Tam's scheme, this can hold independent of the optimal effort level. Under the Finsinger-Vogelsang performance index managers will always show suboptimal effort levels in a steady state equilibrium, because the index only rewards welfare improvements.Effort, however, has to be rewarded even with no improvement in behavior. An improved performance index, which provides cumulative rewards is shown to be strategy proof and lead to a welfare optimum. This reward structure basically treats managers as if they were private entrepreneurs. It looks extremely generous in that it gives managers the fruits of all costs reductions due to increases in effort. Suggestions are made to mitigate this income distributional impact.