Blog Fourteen: Reward

Reward

I have recently been accepted at Waitrose, part of the John Lewis Partnership, and organisation with a difference, because all individuals involved within the partnership are equal partners. Something that attracted me to the partnership was the way in which they treat partners including how they reward them for their hard work, both financially and non-financially. 

Once a year, every partner receives a bonus that is made from the profit the organisation makes throughout the year. The partnership keeps this financial reward fair by ensuring that the more a partner has worked, the more they will receive in bonus. On top of the financial reward that the partnership offers that are also a number of other benefits and rewards available for all partners. An example of one of these rewards includes, that if an individual has consistently worked for the partnership for over 25 years, they will receive 6 months leave, in which they are paid in full and will still have a job to come back to.

This shows that the company value loyalty and are rewarding partners who are loyal and remain a partner for such a long period. As a long-term partner you would feel that your hard work and dedication has been acknowledged.

Many organisations provide large financial bonuses for their Chief Executives regardless of how well the organisation has performed over the previous year. There are arguments around this topic, because many people disagree with policy and feel that it is unfair that the head of the organisation should be rewarded even if they have not met targets or the company is underperforming. They believe that although it is the organisation as a whole that is underachieving, the Chief Executive should take responsibility for this. People believe that if they are receiving a reward in spite of this, they will not be motivated or driven to help improve the organisations performance next year. On the other hand, many argue that just because the organisation as a whole is underperforming, does not necessarily reflect on the Chief Executives performance and therefore argue that should not be punished by not receiving their bonus, if they have done what is required of them personally.

According to The Baltimore Sun. (2005), Critics argue that more performance measurements should be put into place to prevent these disputes as to weather the C.E ‘deserves’ the bonus or not.

References: 

The Baltimore Sun, 2005. Pay Equity [online.] available from: http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-bz.ex.payequity15may15,0,7160910.story {assessed: April 2012}