If You Pay Peanuts...

[JohnDB]

Those who know HR practices and business savvy know the rest.

The Adam's model and theories have been proven to be junk. Abraham said it and proved it. Everyone outside of Government and Academia use Abraham's model. So why do these two systems use the Adam's model? The answer is lawyers and lawsuits.

But

Inside of Academia people have been finding unique ways around the Adam's model. If you know of one...Want to share?

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

What is the Adam's model and Abraham's model?

 

[JohnDB]

What is the Adam's model and Abraham's model?

These are references to Adam's workers equity model for productivity and Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs encouragement model for increasing productivity.

Maslow, in referring to Adam's model stated "If you pay peanuts you get monkeys to work for you"
He later explained that the salaries are perceived as peanuts regardless of the amount of money because of the lack of incentives to excel or go beyond the strictly perceived guidelines of a job. IOW they " See monkey, do monkey" and independent research functions that create excellence in job performance are erased from the workforce... Possibly even perceived as having a punitive effect if performed.
Other criticism of the equity model include that some people aren't money motivated or that can actually feel personally insulted when assigned to specific dollar values for their contributions.

Because of these principles everyone uses Maslow's hierarchy of needs to determine salaries and set goals of performance and resourcefulness with a few highly paid and productive people.

No, salaries are supposed to be secret and those found discussing them are fired without hesitation. But for "whatever" reasons everyone seems to know what everyone else makes anyway.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

I see. Thanks for the explaination. I didn't know Maslow's hierarchy of needs went into productivity theories. I thought it was a hierarchy of how much a person can concern themselves with based on whether their basic needs were being met, and then from there a few different levels of satisfaction playing on the person.

Good to know there might be more to it then that to look into. I had come to a conclusion that the theory had dome merrit, but wasn't quite right because it sermed in order to ever be happy a person had to be fairly wealthy, or successfully be in better straights then their neighbors to compare to. The conclusion for being happy seemed somewhat unbiblical in my opinion.

Who was Adam?

 

[Wrg1405]

Wow this takes me back in time.

Along with Maslow we also have

Herzberg's Motivators and Hygiene Factors

Then we have the child parent and parent child relationship in the workplace.

 

[GodsGrace]

Things have gotten complicated.
When I was in the business world, you got paid according to how much you could do and how well you did it.

If something went wrong , the worker got blamed for it.

Now if something goes wrong, the manager is held responsible.
This is based on the theory that a good manager can make anyone do anything with the proper motivation and supervision.

I find this funny.

I still don't understand the Maslow thing too well.

My two cents, or possibly less in these days.

Wondering