From your readings and discussions of historical approaches to pay and work, it should be clear that great
efforts have been made to link performance and pay. But, from popular business news, we should also be
aware that the practical link of pay to work is not always set up in an equitable environment. Favoritism,
nepotism, and other human shortcomings can and do interfere with the implementation of the best plans. How
to prevent those shortcomings becomes a difficult challenge for HR managers.
If you were designing an incentive plan for a publicly traded company, whose voice do you think should provide
that ethical audit at the table of decision makers? The chairman? The board of directors? The shareholders?
The employees? The executive team or compensation committee? Outside consultants? Internal HR director?
A combination of all of these?
Who in your mind would be the best to ensure that the incentive plan does not cross the line and motivate the
wrong kind of behavior—the kind that turns a plan from motivating good behavior into motivating wrong-doing
based on the potential for a high reward?
In addition, provide at least one reference to a company you have worked for or read about where someone,
motivated by the potential gain from an incentive plan, went beyond the policy and the law, breaking all the
rules.
Consider articles from any of the popular business magazines you read regularly or conduct a quick search for
any articles that have been published currently. An easy search would include incentive pay, shareholders, and
pay policy.
Prepare a succinct opinion in two paragraphs or fewer and post it in this unit’s discussion area.