National Academies Press: OpenBook

Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay (1991)

Chapter: Appendix A: Survey Descriptions

« Previous: References
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

Appendixes

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
This page in the original is blank.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

A Survey Descriptions

A brief description of each survey used in the committee's review of private-sector performance appraisal, merit pay, and variable pay plan practices is presented below. Each description includes a complete survey reference.

The surveys are nearly all proprietary; they are not based on scientific sampling methods and report no sampling frame, error rates, or confidence intervals.

The American Compensation Association

1987 Report on the 1987 Survey of Salary Management Practices. Scottsdale, Ariz.: The American Compensation Association.

No. of Organizations: 1,395

Type of Organizations: 33% manufacturing; 40% services; 27% utilities/other

Size (employees): 31% < 1,000; 69% = 1,000

Respondents: Top personnel officers

Response rate: 24%

Bretz, R., and Milkovich, G.

1989 Performance appraisal in large organizations: practice and research applications. Working Paper #89-17. Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

No. of Organizations: 63

Type of Organizations: Manufacturing

Size (employees): Mean: Exempt = 20,816; Nonexempt = 31,407

Respondents: Top personnel and compensation executives

Response rate: 70%

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

The Bureau of National Affairs

1974 Management performance appraisal programs. Personnel Policies Forum Survey No. 104. Washington, D.C.: The Bureau of National Affairs.

No. of Organizations: 139

Type of Organizations: 50% manufacturing; 25% nonmanufacturing; 25% nonprofit/government

Size (employees): 40% < 1,000; 60% = 1,000

Respondents: Top personnel officers

Response rate: 60%

The Bureau of National Affairs

1981 Wage and salary administration. Personnel Policies Forum Survey No. 131. Washington, D.C.: The Bureau of National Affairs.

No. of Organizations: 183

Type of Organizations: 49% manufacturing; 31% nonmanufacturing; 20% nonprofit/government

Size (employees): 46% < 1,000; 54% = 1,000

Respondents: Top personnel officers

Response rate: 60%

The Bureau of National Affairs

1984 Productivity Improvement Programs. Personnel Policies Forum Survey No. 138. Washington, D.C.: The Bureau of National Affairs.

No. of Organizations: 195

Type of Organizations: 45% manufacturing; 27% nonmanufacturing; 28% nonprofit/government

Size (employees): 53% < 1,000; 47% = 1,000

Respondents: Top personnel officers

Response rate: 65%

(The Personnel Policies Forum surveys vary somewhat in their geographic coverage, but typically try to cover major geographic regions; in the latest survey we used, the responding 31 percent of the responding organizations were headquartered in the South, 27 percent in the North Central states, 23 percent in the West, and 19 percent in the Northeast.)

The Conference Board

1976 Compensating employees: lessons of the 1970s. Conference Board Report No. 707. New York: The Conference Board.

No. of Organizations: 493

Type of Organizations: 54% manufacturing; 46% services/retail & wholesale

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

Size (employees): 23% < 1,000; 77% > 1,000

Respondents: Top compensation executives

Response rate: Not reported

The Conference Board

1977 Appraising managerial performance: current practices and future directions. Conference Board Report No. 723. New York: The Conference Board.

No. of Organizations: 293

Type of Organizations: 41% manufacturing; 59% services/retail & wholesale

Size (employees): 29% < 1,000; 71% > 1,000

Respondents: Top personnel executives

Response rate: Not reported

The Conference Board

1984 Pay and performance: the interaction of compensation and performance appraisal. Conference Research Bulletin No. 155. New York: The Conference Board.

No. of Organizations: 557

Type of Organizations: 54% manufacturing; 46% services

Size (employees): Median: 9,600 manufacturing; 2,130 services

Respondents: Top compensation executives

Response rate: Not reported

The Conference Board

1990 Variable pay: new performance rewards. Conference Board Research Bulletin No. 246. New York: The Conference Board.

No. of Organizations: 435

Type of Organizations: 43% manufacturing; 57% services/retail & wholesale Size (sales): Only companies with sales of > $100 million

Respondents: Top compensation executives

Response rate: 16%

HayGroup, Inc.

1989 Compensation and benefits strategies for 1990 and beyond. The Hay Report. Philadelphia: HayGroup, Inc.

No. of Organizations: 1,098

Type of Organizations: 78.1% industrial; 21.9% financial

Size (employees): Not reported

Respondents: Top compensation managers

Response rate: Not reported

(This report is a compilation of several HayGroup surveys; we used the results from The Hay Compensation Report, 1989.)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

Hewitt Associates

1989 Compensation Trends and Practices Survey, 1989. Lincolnshire, Ill: Hewitt Associates.

No. of Organizations: 705

Type of Organizations: 33% manufacturing; 67% services

Size (employees): 33% < 1,000; 67% = 1,000

Respondents: Compensation managers

Response rate: Not reported

Committee on Performance Appraisal for Merit Pay, National Research Council

1990 The committee solicited additional information on performance appraisal from 28 Conference Board member firms. The respondents represented all major industrial sectors and are generally considered leading firms in human resource management. A draft summary of the responses of these firms is available through the committee's staff files.

O'Dell, C.

1987 People, Performance, and Pay: A Full Report on the American Productivity Center/American Compensation Association National Survey of Non-Traditional Reward and Human Resource Practices. Houston: American Productivity Center.

No. of Organizations: 1,598 (some multiple units of firm)

Type of Organizations: 46% goods; 46% services; 8% government

Size (employees): Not reported

Respondents: 83% personnel; 17% other managers

Response rate: 36%

TPF & C/Towers Perrin

1990 Achieving Results Through Sharing: Group Incentive Program Survey Report. New York: TPF & C/Towers Perrin.

No. of Organizations: 144 companies (177 variable plans)

Type of Organizations: 77% manufacturing; 23% services and retail/wholesale

Size (employees): Median = 2,600; Range = 26 to 300,000 (sales):

Median = $500 million

Respondents: Variable plan designers

Response rate: Not reported

U.S. General Accounting Office

1981 Productivity Improvement Programs: Can They Contribute to Productivity Improvement? AMFD-81-22. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

No. of Organizations: 54

Type of Organizations: 93% manufacturing; 7% services and retail/wholesale

Size (employees): Range from 100 to 100,000

Respondents: Reported only as "officials" of firms

Response rate: 56%

Wallace, M.

1990 Rewards and Renewal: America's Search for Competitive Advantage Through Alternative Pay Strategies. Scottsdale, Ariz.: The American Compensation Association.

No. of Organizations: 46

Type of Organizations: 83% manufacturing; 17% services/utilities

Size (employees): Mean = 19,362; Range = 55 to 90,000

Respondents: Wallace conducted case studies; interviewed key executives, managers, and employees

Response rate: Not applicable

The Wyatt Company

1989 Results of the 1989 Wyatt survey: getting your hands around performance management. Pp. 4-18 in The Wyatt Communicator Fourth Quarter, 1989.

No. of Organizations: 3,052

Type of Organizations: 30% manufacturing; 40% services; 5% utilities/transportation/oil; 6% retail/wholesale; 19% government/nonprofit/other

Size (employees): 65% < 1,000; 35% = 1,000 (25% > 10,000)

Respondents: 93% senior and middle personnel managers

Response rate: Not reported

This survey has a broad geographic representation with 24 percent in the Northeast, 20 percent in the Southeast; 21 percent in the Great Lakes; and 15 percent in the Pacific states (north and south).

The Wyatt Company

1989 The 1989 Survey of Locality Pay Practices in Large U.S. Corporations. Philadelphia: The Wyatt Company.

No. of Organizations: 80

Type Organizations: 44% manufacturing; 19% services; 37% utilities/other Size (employees): 67% = 50,000; 33% > 50,000

Respondents: Top compensation managers

Response rate: Not reported

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×

The Wyatt Company

1987 The 1987 Wyatt Performance Management Survey. Chicago: The Wyatt Company.

No. of Organizations: 805

Type Organizations: 35% manufacturing; 40% services; 25% other

Size (employees): 20% = 1,000; 33% 1,000-5,000; 20% > 5,000

Respondents: Personnel managers

Response rate: Not reported

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 189
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 190
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 191
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 192
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 193
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 194
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 195
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Survey Descriptions." National Research Council. 1991. Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1751.
×
Page 196
Next: Appendix B: Biographical Sketches »
Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $44.95
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

"Pay for performance" has become a buzzword for the 1990s, as U.S. organizations seek ways to boost employee productivity. The new emphasis on performance appraisal and merit pay calls for a thorough examination of their effectiveness. Pay for Performance is the best resource to date on the issues of whether these concepts work and how they can be applied most effectively in the workplace.

This important book looks at performance appraisal and pay practices in the private sector and describes whether—and how—private industry experience is relevant to federal pay reform. It focuses on the needs of the federal government, exploring how the federal pay system evolved; available evidence on federal employee attitudes toward their work, their pay, and their reputation with the public; and the complicating and pervasive factor of politics.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!