Organizational Behaviour Reflection Part 1: The Individual
Verified
Added on 2023/06/11
|6
|1168
|196
AI Summary
This reflection discusses the compensation of top executives in companies and the theories behind it. It also raises ethical questions about the pay gap between executives and other employees.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET STUDENT DETAILS Student name:Student ID number: UNIT AND TUTORIAL DETAILS Unit name:Unit number: Tutorial group:Tutorial day and time: Lecturer or Tutor name: ASSIGNMENT DETAILS Title:REFLECTION PART 1: THE INDIVIDUAL Length:Due date:Date submitted: Home campus (where you are enrolled): DECLARATION ☐I hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged. ☐ I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been copied from any other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made in the assignment. ☐ I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been submitted by me in another (previous or current) assessment, except where appropriately referenced, and with prior permission from the Lecturer / Tutor / Unit Coordinator for this unit. 1of7
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR ☐ No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for me by any other person except where collaboration has been authorised by the Lecturer / Tutor /Unit Coordinator concerned. ☐ I am aware that this work will be reproduced andsubmitted to plagiarism detection software programs for the purpose of detecting possible plagiarism(which may retain a copy on its database for future plagiarism checking). Student’s signature: Note:An examiner or lecturer / tutor has the right to not mark this assignment if the above declaration has not been signed. 2of7
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR REFLECTION PART 1: THE INDIVIDUAL Type your responses in the boxes below: SummaryIn chapter seven, we learnt some serious topics related to the compensation of top executives in many companies. Also, we explored some of the techniques used by employers to determine the amount of compensation for executives. Some of the recent reports, in the media headlines are showing how managers of some Australian companies are pocketing huge amounts which are equal to an average earner’s life time salary. Thus, there are several theories which explain the kind and amount of compensation offered to top level executives. From this analysis I understood that CEO’s are paid based on the nature of responsibility that they do and thus, their compensation should not be compared to others (Bizjak, et al. 2011, 55). Emotional State This topic raised my emotions that CEO take home huge sums of money. Also, the gap between the lowest and the highest paid employee is always wide. I the production process, the employees and junior workers perform much of the functions. Thus, the CEOs are only there to give directions and make decisions. It is sad how a person strains to work only to benefit the few top level executives. When reports circulate that the CEOs are earning a lot of money while others workers are every complaining, it raises an ethical question (Bebchuk and Grinstein, 2005, 66). 2of7
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR Evaluation 2015, was one of the years which reported a lot of information concerning the huge amounts of money pocketed by CEOS. However, there is a compensation committee tasked with the responsibility of assigning people their salaries based on a number of factors. The use of equity theory is very common.Thistheoryimpliesthatpeoplearepaidbasedontheir responsibility and ranking in the company (Shin, et al. 2016, 121). Also, this theory compares data from other organizations to determine how much each individual should be paid. Those people who have same level of education and responsibility are compensated equally. This avoids any kind of disparity in their income. Analysis The equity theory ensures there is fairness among people who have similar functions. For instance, if a person is working as a CEO is a small hospital; thesalaryshouldbesimilartoanotherpersonwhohasasimilar responsibility elsewhere. Thus, compensation is seen as a reward for the labour offered as a factor of production (Neeley and Boyd, 2010, 143). If the input placed in a given task is the same, this should be reflected in the output and the kind of compensation offered. CEO dedicate amount of time to study and gain experience that enables them to execute given functions. Thus, they should also get a compensation that is equal to the level of human capital investment. Conclusions & Recommendations There are people who have criticized this approach on the basis of pay disparities. However, there is a need for harmonization of these salaries to reduce the gap between the lowest and highest paid employee. For instance, 3of7
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR the S & P 500 managers are paid over 250 times what the lowest employees get.Thisissounfairandthus,thecommitteesresponsibleshould harmonize these values (Pepper, et al. 2011, 207). Also, the shareholders of thecompaniesshouldcontributeandparticipateinsalariesand remuneration harmonization.Executives should be paid well to prevent them from engaging in corrupt activities 4of7
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR References Bebchuk, L. and Grinstein, Y., 2005. The growth of executive pay.Oxford review of economic policy,21(2), pp.283-303. Bizjak, J, Lemmon M & Nguyen, T 2011, ‘Are all CEOs above average? An empirical analysis of compensation peer groups and pay design’,Journal of Financial Economics,vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 538– 55;Science Direct database,DOI10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.02.007. Neeley, CR & Boyd, NG 2010, ‘The influence of executive compensation on employee behaviors through precipitating events’,Journal of Managerial Issues,vol. 22, no.4, pp. 546-59, viewed 29 December 2017, ProQuest Central database. Pepper, A, Gosling, T & Gore, J 2015, ‘Fairness, envy, guilt and greed: Building equity considerations into agency theory’,Human Relations,vol.68, no.8, pp. 291-314, viewed29December2017SagePremier2016database,DOI 10.1177/001872671455466. Shin, T 2016, ‘Fair pay or power play? Pay equity, managerial power, and compensation adjustments for CEOs’,Journal of Management,42(2), 419-448,viewed 29 December 2017, ProQuest database. 5of7