Role of External and Internal Strategies in the Choice of Compensation Policies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The competitive position of companies is increasingly linked to their capacity to attract and retain competent personnel. Human resources management, in particular compensation, is a crucial component of this quest for competencies. Yet companies must choose between several types of compensation policies. They must determine on which basis to select a policy so as to maximize the effectiveness of the compensation system. These choices may be linked to external strategies of the company, e.g. diversification, differentiation, or internal strategies such as autonomous work teams, total quality and participative management. This article therefore attempts to analyze the extent to which external and internal strategies identified by companies dictate their choice of compensation policies. In other words, do companies that adopt particular external and internal strategies also opt for differentiated compensation policies?The data were collected by a questionnaire mailed to vice-presidents and human resources managers of Quebec companies in competitive sectors. We received 252 usable questionnaires, equal to an 11.4% response rate. The variables have been grouped into four main categories: compensation policies, external strategies, internal strategies and control variables. By means of a multiple regression analysis using the forced entry method we have tested the contribution of each category of variables, thus allowing for verification of the hypotheses formulated. The control variables were entered first in a single block, followed by the external strategies and internal strategies. Utility tests were performed to verify whether the order of entry of the variables influenced the results obtained.The principal findings suggest that internal strategies dictate the choice of compensation policy to a much greater extent than do external strategies. In effect, companies seek above all to create internal coherence among their HR policies and organizational development strategies. For example, companies that rely heavily on autonomous work teams, engage in more participative management and promote quality management have compensation systems that are less traditional and characterized by a greater emphasis on performance, transparency of information provided to employees and, to a lesser extent, leader pay policies and decentralization of decision-making, which is consistent with the literature. Regarding the impact of external strategies, our results are more mitigated. Only competitive strategies emanating from business units exert a slight influence on the choice of compensation policies. Moreover, corporate strategies such as degree of diversification do not affect the choice of compensation policies. This type of strategy is apparently too far removed from the concerns of HR managers. Lastly, of the control variables examined, unionization plays the most determining role in the choice of compensation policies. In fact, this variable is the most consequential in our analytical model. This result raises important questions about the importance of the strategic approach to human resources management and reinforces the relevance of exploring institutional approaches to compensation policies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».