Introduction
Organizations, whether profit making, governmental or nonprofit, require human resources for their operations; when employees are working as a team, the main challenge facing management is whether motivation among employees is enhanced through individual members compensation or compensating an entire team (Henderson, 2003).
This paper with the focus of Alaskan Tire Corporation explains three main reasons why incentives for good work or otherwise should be team based rather than on individual basis.
Facilitating team spirit
Workers engage their mind, time, expertise, and intellectualism in their works; they expect to be compensated through wages, salaries, bonuses, and non-cash benefits. When their efforts are attributed to attainment of a certain corporate goal, then when paid as a team there is growth of team spirit.
According to employment agreement, an employer and employee are obliged to respect labor law in the country of operation and uphold to employment-contract terms and conditions.
Developing an efficient team is the role of personnel management assisted by top and line managers; it starts with human resources planning to appraisal, motivation, rewards, and ends with termination of employment contract (Milkovich & Newman, 2006).
Terms of employment vary with organizations and so do human resources practices like selection, contracting, and recruitment. One of the major functions of human resources department is developing a compensation strategy that satisfies all the employees irrespective of their rank, an effective reward strategy should be able to trigger motivation and increase the zeal to work-hard in an organization (Henderson, 2003).
To grow cohesion among team members
When team members get incentives as a group, every member will feel obliged to perform his duty effectively and feel that he has a burden to perform effectively since his performance will not only be pegged on his own achievements but the achievement of the larger group.
When team is working together, they engage in activities where they need each other; when incentives are given to the group, communication will be facilitated as every member will be feeling that there is need to assist the other as they have a common goal to attain (Kleiman, 2000).
It enhances motivation in teams
When employers compensate performance of the team as a whole, then staffs are motivated to work harder and remain loyal to their employer and look forward to attain the team goals, objectives and targets.
According to motivational theory by Victor Vroom of Yale School of Management called Expectancy theory, employees are motivated by the benefits they get from their employer: When they get higher returns, they are likely to improve their performance to the benefit of the employer.
The theory tries to relate the ways human resources can be motivated in their day-to-day duties. Motivation is the drive an individual has; it makes him persevere to attain set goals either in life or in an organization. People have different personalities and so do different things motivate them (Harold & Michael, 1994).
Incentives should reflect the performance of an employee; good performers should enjoy a higher pay. Remunerations rates influences staff motivation and commitment to their tasks, thus having an effective reward system has an overall benefit to an organization.
Conclusion
The president of Alaskan Tire Corporation should adopt a team-based incentive mechanism rather than individual based mechanism; with such a mechanism, teams within the company will develop team spirit, team cohesion and be highly motivated.
References
Harold, F. & Michael, D.(1994). Motivation: theory and research. New Jersey: Routledge.
Henderson, R.(2003). Compensation Management in a Knowledge-Based World. 9th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kleiman, S. (2000).Human Resource Management: A Tool for Competitive Advantage. Cincinnati: South-Western College Publishing.
Milkovich, T., & Newman, J.(2006). Compensation. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.