A state university system in the southeast recently instituted a "Teacher Incentive Program" (TIP) for its faculty. Basically, faculty committees within each university's college were told to award $5,000 raises (not bonuses) to about 40% of their faculty members based on how good a job they did teaching undergraduates and how many they taught per year. What are the potential advantages and pitfalls of such an incentive program? How well do you think it was accepted by the faculty? Do you think it had the desired effect?
From United States, Carmel
From United States, Carmel
"....faculty committees within each university's college were told to award $5,000 raises." - Told, as in directed, making it a given, and as with any scheme involving money, they will spend it. How wisely remains to be seen. Keep in mind that these are academians who may have little or no "real world." experience, especially in terms of pay for performance.
Raises, not bonuses - becomes part of their permanent income.
A good compensation plan should consist of wages/salaries and incentives (bonuses). Traditionally, wages/salaries were set for the responsibility and authority of the position. Wages increased on average, at least by the rate of inflation, with special consideration given for promotion, and achievement "over and above" .
Incentives, on the other hand, are rewards for reaching a meaningful, measurable goal which compliments the objectives of the organization.
In order to be effective, incentives (Pay for Performance programs) must involve risk to the employee in the form of a wage reduction (optimum being 20%), to be recouped, theoretically, by the incentive ?gbonus?h, (note I did not say "raise"). In other words, incentives are not an addition to wages, but a supplement thereto, based on performance.
In this case one glaring pitfall is measurement. How does one measure the "good job teaching"? Who will measure? What are the benchmarks? Higher grades? This criteria is in the hands of the professor, who has a self-interest in awarding higher grades to mediocre students so that s/he can claim the $5,000 "reward". What about the difficulty inherent in some courses? Math and Physics versus History and English? Engineering versus Physical Education?
A performance pay system should be designed to promote the kind of performance an organization needs. In order to do so:
an analysis should first be made of the objectives and results sought
the principles/policies and practices needed to obtain the results. These policies and practices should form part of an overall human resource management strategy.
The criteria for the determination of performance pay should be:
objective
measurable and measure only what is important
that it is operated along with an appraisal system which measures performance appropriately
designed to feed back information to employees.
easily understood related to what is controllable, so as to exclude what is beyond the control of employees
The intrinsic reward system should be strengthened if need be, e.g. through:
consultation, communication, participatory systems
training
job satisfaction and responsibility reorganization of work processes
Problems:
Inadequate criteria to measure performance, or criteria which are not easily understood, communicated and accepted. Performance pay should therefore be negotiated.
Inappropriate performance appraisal systems in that the objectives of the appraisal system (e.g. where it is intended to identify training needs) do not match the objectives of the reward system.
The absence of regular feedback on performance.
The reward system is not designed to meet the objectives sought to be achieved. There could be a variety of objectives e.g. to satisfy distributive justice, attract and retain capable staff, match particular levels of pay in the labor market, change organizational culture or to reinforce it.
The absence of a right mix of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards.
The lack of an appropriate quantum of pay which should be subject to performance criteria. This occurs when the amount which depends on performance is too small, or it is too large and therefore the amount placed at risk (when performance is poor) is not acceptable to employees.
The absence of periodic evaluation of the scheme.
Non-recognition of the fact that performance, is sometimes (even often) dependent on factors outside the control of employees.
Where the performance earnings fall employees are less inclined to accept reductions in their guaranteed pay
Where the extra payments replace a fixed wage component and is not an additional component of pay, there is a greater likelihood that the extra pay is matched by performance increases. In the case of group incentives payments are never proportionate to individual performance, as poor performers ("free riders") benefit from the efforts of others.
Proponents of pay-for-performance programs believe they will attract and retain better teachers and offer incentives to motivate and reward improved teaching. They view uniform teacher salary schedules, the traditional standard in teacher compensation, as ineffective in attracting and retaining sufficient numbers of effective teachers and as out of touch with compensation practices in other industries that tie salary to employee performance.
Opponents of pay-for-performance, on the other hand, fear that the many difficulties involved in evaluating and measuring teachers?f performance will result in unfair practices. They also believe that much of what is important about teaching is not performance-related and that performance pay will create competition between teachers and undermine the collaborative nature of the profession.
KEY QUESTIONS:
?¡ What kinds of activities or behaviors is the performance-based pay plan intended to promote?
?¡ How significant a percentage of the total teacher?fs salary will be comprised by performance-based pay?
?¡ Will the evaluation of teachers?f performance be based on student results, demonstration of professional skills and knowledge, or a combination of the two?
?¡ Will performance pay be awarded to individual teachers, groups of teachers or the entire school staff?
?¡ What mechanisms and opportunities for feedback and remediation will be in place?
?¡ What role can state policymakers play in fostering and supporting pay-for-performance systems?
LESSONS LEARNED
?¡ Developing a pay-for-performance system should be a collaborative effort including all stakeholders from the beginning.
?¡ Designing and implementing a pay-for-performance program takes commitment, time and a willingness to envision a new system.
?¡ Reflecting upon the experiences of other districts and states that have implemented or wrestled with alternative teacher pay systems can be invaluable.
?¡ Constant, consistent communication to all stakeholders, including teachers, administrators, parents, policymakers, the public, and the media helps promote acceptance and an ongoing understanding of the program.
?¡ Teacher evaluations should offer diagnostic feedback and align with teacher performance standards and intended outcomes. In addition, teacher evaluations need to be fair and to measure what teachers legitimately can be held accountable for
?¡ Both teachers and principals must be given the training they need to understand, administer and make effective use of student and teacher assessments.
?¡ A pay-for-performance system cannot be implemented successfully without attention to other factors, such as fiscal policies, data gathering and dissemination capacity, standards for good teaching, solid assessments of student learning and teacher performance, and the availability of high-quality professional development.
I think that it was well received by 40% of the facility because it was ill conceived. Each memeber sees a $5,000 increase in pay. The other 60%, the majority, will be disenfranchised and begin to undermine the plan as unjust, arbitrary and capricious.
Unless or until the plan is modified to provide for the (seemingly)unanswered questions, I don't see the TIP scheme lasting more than 18 months.
PALADIN
From United States,
9Raises, not bonuses - becomes part of their permanent income.
A good compensation plan should consist of wages/salaries and incentives (bonuses). Traditionally, wages/salaries were set for the responsibility and authority of the position. Wages increased on average, at least by the rate of inflation, with special consideration given for promotion, and achievement "over and above" .
Incentives, on the other hand, are rewards for reaching a meaningful, measurable goal which compliments the objectives of the organization.
In order to be effective, incentives (Pay for Performance programs) must involve risk to the employee in the form of a wage reduction (optimum being 20%), to be recouped, theoretically, by the incentive ?gbonus?h, (note I did not say "raise"). In other words, incentives are not an addition to wages, but a supplement thereto, based on performance.
In this case one glaring pitfall is measurement. How does one measure the "good job teaching"? Who will measure? What are the benchmarks? Higher grades? This criteria is in the hands of the professor, who has a self-interest in awarding higher grades to mediocre students so that s/he can claim the $5,000 "reward". What about the difficulty inherent in some courses? Math and Physics versus History and English? Engineering versus Physical Education?
A performance pay system should be designed to promote the kind of performance an organization needs. In order to do so:
an analysis should first be made of the objectives and results sought
the principles/policies and practices needed to obtain the results. These policies and practices should form part of an overall human resource management strategy.
The criteria for the determination of performance pay should be:
objective
measurable and measure only what is important
that it is operated along with an appraisal system which measures performance appropriately
designed to feed back information to employees.
easily understood related to what is controllable, so as to exclude what is beyond the control of employees
The intrinsic reward system should be strengthened if need be, e.g. through:
consultation, communication, participatory systems
training
job satisfaction and responsibility reorganization of work processes
Problems:
Inadequate criteria to measure performance, or criteria which are not easily understood, communicated and accepted. Performance pay should therefore be negotiated.
Inappropriate performance appraisal systems in that the objectives of the appraisal system (e.g. where it is intended to identify training needs) do not match the objectives of the reward system.
The absence of regular feedback on performance.
The reward system is not designed to meet the objectives sought to be achieved. There could be a variety of objectives e.g. to satisfy distributive justice, attract and retain capable staff, match particular levels of pay in the labor market, change organizational culture or to reinforce it.
The absence of a right mix of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards.
The lack of an appropriate quantum of pay which should be subject to performance criteria. This occurs when the amount which depends on performance is too small, or it is too large and therefore the amount placed at risk (when performance is poor) is not acceptable to employees.
The absence of periodic evaluation of the scheme.
Non-recognition of the fact that performance, is sometimes (even often) dependent on factors outside the control of employees.
Where the performance earnings fall employees are less inclined to accept reductions in their guaranteed pay
Where the extra payments replace a fixed wage component and is not an additional component of pay, there is a greater likelihood that the extra pay is matched by performance increases. In the case of group incentives payments are never proportionate to individual performance, as poor performers ("free riders") benefit from the efforts of others.
Proponents of pay-for-performance programs believe they will attract and retain better teachers and offer incentives to motivate and reward improved teaching. They view uniform teacher salary schedules, the traditional standard in teacher compensation, as ineffective in attracting and retaining sufficient numbers of effective teachers and as out of touch with compensation practices in other industries that tie salary to employee performance.
Opponents of pay-for-performance, on the other hand, fear that the many difficulties involved in evaluating and measuring teachers?f performance will result in unfair practices. They also believe that much of what is important about teaching is not performance-related and that performance pay will create competition between teachers and undermine the collaborative nature of the profession.
KEY QUESTIONS:
?¡ What kinds of activities or behaviors is the performance-based pay plan intended to promote?
?¡ How significant a percentage of the total teacher?fs salary will be comprised by performance-based pay?
?¡ Will the evaluation of teachers?f performance be based on student results, demonstration of professional skills and knowledge, or a combination of the two?
?¡ Will performance pay be awarded to individual teachers, groups of teachers or the entire school staff?
?¡ What mechanisms and opportunities for feedback and remediation will be in place?
?¡ What role can state policymakers play in fostering and supporting pay-for-performance systems?
LESSONS LEARNED
?¡ Developing a pay-for-performance system should be a collaborative effort including all stakeholders from the beginning.
?¡ Designing and implementing a pay-for-performance program takes commitment, time and a willingness to envision a new system.
?¡ Reflecting upon the experiences of other districts and states that have implemented or wrestled with alternative teacher pay systems can be invaluable.
?¡ Constant, consistent communication to all stakeholders, including teachers, administrators, parents, policymakers, the public, and the media helps promote acceptance and an ongoing understanding of the program.
?¡ Teacher evaluations should offer diagnostic feedback and align with teacher performance standards and intended outcomes. In addition, teacher evaluations need to be fair and to measure what teachers legitimately can be held accountable for
?¡ Both teachers and principals must be given the training they need to understand, administer and make effective use of student and teacher assessments.
?¡ A pay-for-performance system cannot be implemented successfully without attention to other factors, such as fiscal policies, data gathering and dissemination capacity, standards for good teaching, solid assessments of student learning and teacher performance, and the availability of high-quality professional development.
I think that it was well received by 40% of the facility because it was ill conceived. Each memeber sees a $5,000 increase in pay. The other 60%, the majority, will be disenfranchised and begin to undermine the plan as unjust, arbitrary and capricious.
Unless or until the plan is modified to provide for the (seemingly)unanswered questions, I don't see the TIP scheme lasting more than 18 months.
PALADIN
From United States,
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Conf_RevMeeting _CPFC_20570_MOM 10% refund on admin charges incentive.pdf
5 S Program.ppt
TEACHER PERFORMANCE APPRISAL SYSTEM.zip