Reasons for variation in performance rating
In a case where two employees perform the same job, and all of him or her have exemplary ratings, the evaluation team could decide to give one employee a smaller percentage merit because his pay falls within a lower quartile and give another employee a larger merit percentage because his pay falls within a higher quartile. The first quartile consists of individuals who meet minimum qualifications and have no sufficient experience (Kahn & Lange, 2014). This is basically an entry level position where those who are employed require more training to expand their knowledge skills. Due to the nature of this position, the criteria that are used to grade them is not highly aggressive. Furthermore, individuals who perform highly in this quartile might not necessarily be performing because they have an understanding of the job rather it could be that their performance has improved substantially from their time of being hired.
The third quartile is a preserve of experienced employees who are consistent in executing their duties independently. These employees consistently exceed expectations by exhibiting the core competencies that are required in that position (Kahn & Lange, 2014). Their percentage of merit does not compare to the employees in lower quartiles since a recorded improvement in performance could impact the results of an entire department substantially leading to increased efficiency or a higher level of profitability. Though the two employees perform the same jobs, they have different responsibilities due to their positions in the organization.
Ethical dilemmas encountered by sales professionals
The following ethical dilemmas are encountered by marketing professionals and they determine how far a sales marketer is supposed to go in stealth marketing. If an actor who is hired by a company poses as an ordinary individual to praise the product of a company, this situation could be referred to as stealth marketing. Though this type of marketing may be effective in instances where the consumer does not trust the product, it is a dishonest way of marketing. Other companies could hire publicity officials to write recommendations for the company’s products online (McClaren, 2013). It is advisable that marketers engage in honesty to allow consumers sample company products in natural settings.
A marketer could be persuaded to sell this consumer information which is highly private. Similarly, marketers face an ethical dilemma on whether they should recall a product that is flawed. At times the marketers struggle with this issue since they think information on a defective product in the company could harm the reputation of the company and its ability to make future sales (McClaren, 2013). Sales professionals continually engage in comparison marketing as they compare the products produced by their company to the products of their competitors. This is a common strategy in marketing, but it is important for a marketer to ensure that they do not cross the line and end up damaging then the reputation of another company falsely by fabricating details on products produced by rival companies.
How sales compensation programs can be modified to minimize ethical dilemmas
Sales compensation programmers are set by businesses to compensate sales people effectively. This type of competition ensures that sales people observe ethical standards in marketing the company’s products. Often times, sales people are paid on commission with their base salaries being meager (Johnston & Marshall, 2016). Companies reason that it is not necessary to include sales people in the company payroll since they could be paid highly while bringing very little sales. At times, this compensation plan could heap pressure on the sales people causing them to compromise their ethical standards to earn higher incomes.
It is possible that companies design their sales compensation program to properly compensate their top sales people when the season is low. In periods of high interest rates, economic recession, and poor weather, the sales of some products could go down (Johnston & Marshall, 2016). The company can ensure that their sales force is able to continue earning a decent income by giving them a reasonable pay on the basis of past performance. Sales people who handle sensitive consumer information line online marketers should be compensated highly to ensure that they are not enticed by the allure of companies who would proposition them to purchase private consumer details.
How merit pay grids undermine employee motivation
Merit pay grids lead to healthy competition in many instances. However, merit pay has been largely associated with the effect that it has on compromising the team spirit in a department in a company. In many instances, a differentiation in pay could dampen the enthusiasm of team top put the same effort without sabotaging each other (Gerhart & Fang, 2014). A difference in pay merit easily tempts the employees to put their individual goals over group goals. Many times, employees feel that pay variations are a consequence of external factors that may not be directly linked to the performance of the employee. Teachers pay may be dependent on the performance of their students while the pay of an employee could be tagged on the relationship they have with their supervisor (Gerhart & Fang, 2014). In other instances, employees become demotivated since the criteria used to arrive at salary payments is not easily understandable. In some situations, employees could be paid higher because they are related to the supervisor or because they have a relationship with the supervisor thereby demotivating the hardworking employees.
References
Kahn, L. B., & Lange, F. (2014). Employer learning, productivity, and the earnings distribution: Evidence from performance measures. The Review of Economic Studies, 81(4), 1575-1613.
McClaren, N. (2013). The personal selling and sales management ethics research: Managerial implications and research directions from a comprehensive review of the empirical literature. Journal of business ethics, 112(1), 101-125.
Johnston, M. W., & Marshall, G. W. (2016). Sales force management: Leadership, innovation, technology. Routledge.new York City
Gerhart, B., & Fang, M. (2014). Pay for (individual) performance: Issues, claims, evidence and the role of sorting effects. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), 41-52.
