Reviews : Does Performance Pay Motivate? A Study of Inland Revenue Staff, A Report for the Inland Revenue Staff Federation by Dr R. Richardson and Dr D. Marsden, ISRF, 1991, £15.00, 52pp
| Author | Richard A. Chapman |
| Published date | 01 December 1991 |
| Date | 01 December 1991 |
| DOI | 10.1177/095207679100600305 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
57
REVIEWS
Does
Performance
Pay
Motivate?
A
Study
of
Inland
Revenue
Staff,
A
Report
for
the
Inland
Revenue
Staff
Federation
by
Dr
R.
Richardson
and
Dr D.
Marsden,
ISRF,
1991,
£15.00,
52pp.
The
Chancellor
of
the
Exchequer,
in
reply
to
a
Parliamentary
Question
(24.
vii.91),
said
that
performance
related
pay
is
to
be
an
important
means
of
improving
the
quality
of
public
services
and
therefore
of
contributing
to
the
Citizens’
Charter
Programme.
He
said the
Government
wants
to
introduce
more
flexible
pay
regimes
for
the
Civil
Service,
to
reward
good
performance
and
penalise
bad.
However,
this
seems
to
be
a
commitment
based
on
an
untested
hypothesis.
Like
many
other
aspects
of
public
sector
management,
no
proper
research
appears
to
have
been
done
on
performance
related
pay
before
the
Government
announced
its
commitment
to
it.
This
Report
by
Ray
Richardson
and
David
Marsden,
of
the
Industrial
Relations
Department
of
the
London
School
of
Economics,
should
therefore
be
particularly
welcomed
for
two
reasons.
It is
a
valuable
addition
to
the
literature
on
personnel
management
in
the
British
civil
service.
It
is
also
an
important
contribution,
not
funded
by
the
Government,
to
the
debate
about
policies
for
the
public
sector.
Commissioned
over
a
year
ago
by
the
Inland
Revenue
Staff
Federation,
the
Report
is
the
result
of
questionnaires
sent
out
to
4,000
staff,
fully
representative
of
Revenue
staff
as
a
whole
(i.e.
from
Revenue
Typist
to
Senior
Inspector),
to
investigate
the
impact
of
performance
pay
on
the
motivation
of
staff.
The
official
side
in
the
Inland
Revenue
was
invited
to
participate
by
jointly
sponsoring
the
research
but
chose
not
to.
However,
they
did
co-operate
by
providing
information;
in
identifying
the
sample
of
staff,
in
accordance
with
the
researchers’
specifications,
from
their
personnel
records;
and
through
distributing
the
questionnaires
through
the
internal
mailing
service.
Although
no
reminders
were
sent,
the
sample
response
rate
was
excellent:
slightly
above
60%.
The
questionnaire
and
tables
based
on
the
replies
are
printed
in
the
Report,
which
is
clearly
written,
in
a
jargon-free
style,
and
makes
for
lively
reading.
The
key
questions
being
addressed
were;
has
performance
pay
succeeded
in
motivating
Revenue
staff;
and
why,
or
why
not?
Early
in
the
Report
it
is
made
clear
that
motivation
does
not
automatically
translate
into
performance
because
staff
may
be
highly
motivated
but
perform
badly
or
they
can
be
poorly
motivated
but
perform
well.
Moreover,
motivation
is
a
willingness
or
preparedness
to
do
something,
it
is
a
state
of
mind.
Therefore
the
approach
of
the
researchers
was
to
measure
motivation
through
the
responses
of
staff
to
a
variety
of
statements
about
themselves
and
their
fellow
employees.
Performance
pay
was
introduced
into
the
Inland
Revenue
in
1988.
It
works
on
the
basis
of
rewarding
staff
who
receive
high
assessments
in
the
long-standing
staff
appraisal
system.
Key
qualities
assessed
are:
standard
of
work,
personal
skills,
management,
communication,
working
relationships,
and
knowledge.
These
criteria
are
subdivided
in
the
staff
appraisal
form
(e.g.
into
oral
and
written
communication,
and
working
relationships
with
colleagues
and
with
the
public),
To continue reading
Request your trial