Implications Of Pay For Performance And Reward System For Productivity Of Organisation -Evidence From Project Management Environment’.

2. Aim

The main aim of this work is critical examination of implication of reward system and pay for performance on productivity of organisations and empirically testing it in project management setting specifically in construction firms of UK.

3. Objectives

Precise objectives of this study are:

• To analyse the nature of pay for performance and reward system on productivity of construction firms.

 

• To identify the implications of both, pay for performance and reward system in project management environment of construction firms.

 

• To theoretically and empirically validate the association between pay for performance and reward system in construction sector of UK.

 

4. Introduction

In most of the project oriented organisations, employee and employer relation is considered as an exchange process. Employee gives its skills and aptitudes as an input and receives various pays or rewards from the employer (Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2012). From employee view point, pay is an important aspect as it affects its living status and standard. Other reward and compensations include bonus, healthcare, etc. that serves the wellbeing of employees (Van De Voorde et al., 2012). In contrast, employer perceive both pay and reward in two ways; as a major business cost that requires attention and as an investment that should be organized to utilize behaviours and skills of the employees that impact productivity of organisation (Shields et al., 2015).

The fact that reward system enhances organisational productivity has grown and seen in the early research work.  According to Drucker (2013), employees that are happy are more productive. On the other hand, pay for performance is also associated with the productive performance of firms. Hartmann and Slapni?ar's (2012) research work highlights the importance of understanding and setting pay for employees to achieve organisational goals. Little attention is paid on this area. Pay and rewards are two drivers of organisational productivity.  It tends to increase commitment and encourage employee relation which in turn enhances firms’ performance (Hon, 2012). Moreover, conflicts in firm usually rise because of employees deprived feelings towards their rewards and pay for their performance. So, in this regard significance of pays and reward system cannot be neglected (Sauermann and Stephan, 2013). Pay for performance and reward system are helpful in maintaining and retaining productive performance of firms.

Construction industry of UK is a leading sector of the economy. This sector is of importance as it serves in strengthening the economy of the country. Construction industry works in a project management environment (Butcher and Sheehan, 2010). Productive performance of project has always been a significant issue. The role played by construction projects cannot be inflated, among that includes designing, pre-constructing, procuring, and other constructing activities. Yet the success of all the activities rely on performance of employee which is boosted by their pay and rewards (Gadde and Dubois, 2010). The important task of any construction project is to fulfil employee needs to attain productive performance. So, this study aims to identify the implication for pay for performance and reward system, by which a firm can achieve productive performance.

5. Relevance

The study of this nature is of immense importance, as it explains the benefits that help organisational existence and continuous survival in the competitive environment. Organisational manager or Project manager or its HRM department will get benefits from the study, by aiding in selecting and designing suitable pay scales and reward system. Likewise, this will highlight the cost and benefit of such system connected with operations of organisation, which will help in avoidance of organisational conflicts (Drucker, 2013; Hartmann and Slapni?ar, 2012). Additionally, this work will elucidate whether, pay and rewards system impact and enhance the productive activities of the organisation which will help firms to take decisions on pay related aspects. Academically, this study will be significant, as it utilises various up to date literature review that will be helpful for future studies. Study on such matters enhances the knowledge of the researcher on aspects like pay for performance, compensation, reward system, profitable performance and productivity of project oriented companies especially construction companies.

6 Approach

To fulfil the aim of underlying study, the researcher has aimed at relying on secondary data. The secondary information will be obtained from business reports, construction companies’ websites, published reports of industry and peer reviewed journal articles. Along with this, news information and other non-academic sources might also be considered for establishing background information of the study. The reason for relying on secondary data lies in the fact that secondary information is extensive available and it allows to increase reach of the study. Results of the study might be extended from large pool of evidences being drawn about construction industry HRM practices related to pay for performance and reward system. This approach is likely to enable the researcher to understand that how pay for performance and reward system can lead to success or failure of construction projects.  

7. Planning

The research has been planned in systematic manner. Followed by submission of proposal the researcher will start working on exploring the secondary sources of information. Data collection is considered as most important part of research as all analysis depends upon it. During the collection of data, substantial importance will be offered to ethical aspects of the research. It has been identified by literature review that secondary data has been used by different studies for investigation of pay for performance in defining productivity of business and thus, it has guided on data collection procedures. Data will mainly be obtained from secondary sources that are highly dependable and provide quality data. The published reports of construction industry, websites of major construction firms and peer reviewed journals are all considered as credible and dependable source of information, thus study’s results are likely to offer greater validity.

At this stage, the literature review has completed and understanding of underlying theoretical concepts has been generated. The literature review is used as the source to align the secondary data collection with aim of the study and is likely to offer an evidence of theoretical relevancy of data. After completion of data collection process the data will be analysed and finding of the study will be extended. The findings will lead towards the conclusion and future directions.

 

 

 

 

 

PART B: Critical analysis of academic journal papers

Section 1-a: Introduction and scope

In determining success and failure of any firm, pay for performance and reward system plays a vital role (Blinder, 2011). Employees work efforts towards firms’ productivity are not for free. Employees display work efforts on the basis of their pay and rewards they receive on showing effective performance (Hewitt, 2012). For project-oriented firms, employees pay and reward system are two motivational factors that influence the productive performance of organisation. In this regard, this study will be conducted to analyse the implications, which pay for performance and rewards system can offer for organisational productivity. To ensure maximum skill utilisation of employees, pay for performance and rewards system are two instrument to put emphasis on. This study is firmly focused to measure implications of these two instruments on enhancing the productivity and profitability of the construction firms. The study will be carried out in the construction firms of UK only. It will cover almost all the construction firm working in area of researchers’ resident.  Thus, the specific context of is linked with the construction industry.

The scope of study can be seen through the inclusion criteria of the study. The journal paper analysis mainly based on the most recent research papers, which are related with the pay for performance and reward system of the organisation. The research papers of year 2012, 2013 and 2014 are being chosen based on their relevancy of the underlying research issue. All of these papers are diverse in nature and aim is to link them with construction system.

Section 1-b: Search and selection strategy

Research objectives were shaped and analysed that provides a pathway in determining search and selection strategy for the literature review.

Key Words

The underlying research topic is related with pay for performance and reward system. To save time keywords and synonyms related to the topic were used to find research articles. The keywords for research were pay for performance, reward system, firms productivity, and performance of project oriented firms, synonym used for alternate searches were compensation, pay scales, rewards, profitability and effectiveness of organisations. Along with this, some indirect phrases were also used such as performance evaluation, employees’ related benefits and fringe benefits offered to employees in project management environment.

Search engines

For an effective searching, a proper planning and reliable research sources are necessary. For searching literature relevant to the research topic different bibliographic databases, library and journals were used. The searching of literature was from different journals including Elsevier B.V., Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., Taylor & Francis Group, Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Wiley Online Library and ScienceDirect. Along with this, Google Scholar has also been used as an important research engine and relevant data was extracted based on its suitability.

Strategy and Criteria

Initially, the research papers published after 2010 were scanned and then the articles that were cited more than 50 times were chosen (based on recent time frame, the citation criteria were considered at lower end). The research articles were selected through abstracting or after scanning the research paper. In sum, systematically literature was looked in the online libraries, for journal articles retrospective approach was utilised and to get a clear picture of topic targeted searching was done.

 

 

Section 2: Critical Analysis of Four Academic

 Core paper 1

Title: Gerhart, B. and Fang, M. (2014). ‘Pay for (individual) performance: Issues, claims, evidence and the role of sorting effects’. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), pp.41-52.

Rationale

The rational of selecting this article for critical analysis is that it explains the importance of organisational effectiveness in context of pay for individual performance. Positive and negative aspects are covered and basic of that four claims are made and tested. Moreover, in this paper the researcher analysed different survey already conducted by other companies to reach on a conclusion, thus this paper has detailed and valid information.

Summary of Context and Findings

This research paper answers two main question related to pay for individual performance (PFIP). First is, what is existing amount of PFIP and second is, what are both positive and negative effect related PFIP. Positive effects of PFIP includes incentive and sorting effect; and negative effects claims that PFIP is not a motivator, it is not effective in teams, and do not fit in many cultures. This paper covers that effectiveness of PFIP is different in team and in some cultures. It demonstrated conceptual treatment of PFIP in organisation and its effectiveness in different context. On basis of compression it was found that PFIP have both advantages (incentive effect) as well as disadvantages (sorting effect). The analysis concluded that different positive practices of PFIP are most likely influence the effectiveness of organisation. But it was also found that PFIP singly cannot be a motivator for effectiveness of firms’ performance, sort effect of PFIP sometimes can also adversely impact the performance. Thus in many case different firms, individuals and economies on average get significant organisational effectiveness from PFIP. Successful PFIP strategy depends upon its design and application. It was noticed that higher the PFIP incentive intensity in result based plans higher will be the performance, as gain comes with risks so higher risks can likewise have negative impacts. So, a careful balance between result based plan and behaviour based plans is necessary among individual and group performance is required.

Analysis of Research methodology

It adopted comparison of different survey methodology. It analysed different survey to evaluate the results. Survey was conducted by different other companies on PFIP effectiveness in an organisation and thus this methodology has high validity as already established and reliable data has made the foundation of study.

Comparison with related papers

In comparison with other papers, this paper describes PFIP in diverse cultural context and in teams. It utilises a comparison survey methodology to explain the results (Hartmann and Slapni?ar, 2012). From this paper, it can be deduced that PFIP is an important aspect for organisation effective performance. It has mentioned that positive effect (incentive) as well as negative effect significantly impact the performance of firm. PIFP is a motivator but not an only motivator on which a company can rely. Similarly, it also varies in different cultural context as well. Similar arguments are also presented by Brehm, Imberman and Lovenheim (2017). This paper is of significant importance as it is mainly based on classic research and recent conceptualisation on the topic which make it of substantial importance to draw conclusions on effectiveness of pay for performance. Other related researches have mainly focused on primary data collection which offers limited scope (Drucker, 2013).

Conclusion

From this paper, it can be concluded that PFIP is an important aspect that should be designed appropriately to achieve effective performance of firm. Thus, the firms should rely on customised approach to align the pay for performance dimensions with culture and specific context of the organisation.

Core Paper 2

Title: Eijkenaar, F., Emmert, M., Scheppach, M. and Schöffski, O. (2013). ‘Effects of pay for performance in health care: a systematic review of systematic reviews’. Health policy, 110(2), pp.115-130.

Rationale

The rationale of selecting this paper is that it is a detailed literature review of pay for performance effects in health care sector. An extensive literature can be a helpful source for the understanding of research topic in detail. Moreover, it also highlights the loophole that can also be utilised to conduct any future research work. The research is conducted on health care sector and inclusion of this article as core articles lies in the fact that it has offered comprehensive information on pay for performance and linking this knowledge with construction sector is a substantial opportunity.

Summary of Context and Findings

This study was conducted with the objective of providing a complete picture of impacts of pay for performance in a wider scope. On basis of findings, results were formulated and were published in a systematic manner. The findings of the extensive literature review propose that pay for performance can be cost efficient but on other hand many other studies result was contrary to that. A weak impact of pay for performance in socioeconomic groups was found; and in some other variation that impact was continual. Evidence explains the accidental consequences of pay for performance that includes spill over effect. Yet many positive effect of pay for performance was also found.

Research Methodology Analysis

The methodology of this paper was based on extensive research review from five different electronic databases that were published in time frame of year 2000 to 2011. The literature review was elicited from three languages including Spanish, germen and English. Furthermore, searching on internet was also conducted along with the reference tracking. For appropriate searching two of the authors were on duty of titles reviewing, evaluating article for selecting it for review, considered the quality of methodology and lastly through extraction included the relevant information. This methodology is extensively used in research and well appreciated for generating comprehensive understanding of the research. Thus, the methodology is appropriate for offering detailed investigation of underlying issue.

Comparison with other related papers

In comparison with other this paper focus on shaping results on basis of pervious literature review. This research has extensive literature on impacts of pay for performance that are organised in a systematic manner. This research can be considered as conclusive study which has reflected upon findings of diverse studies and offered that there is still a need to carry out further research for generating conclusion about effect for pay for performance within organisation. Unlike, the studies of McDonald (2014), this research has not offered simple consensus with the positive effect of pay for performance aspect and maintained that there could be diverse impacts of pay for performance, including both positive as well as negative. Additionally, it has also maintained compliance with different studies, including research of Jirjahn (2015) and Kondo et al. (2016).

Conclusion

On basic of that it was concluded that though there exists immense data on impact of pay for performance effects yet a valid conclusion cannot be made as there were fewer studies with strong methodological design. Moreover, literature on specific effects of pay for performance is missing particularly because many did not emphasise on searching that effect (Kondo et al., 2016). From this article, it can be concluded that pay for performance do impact the performance of firm yet its effects need to be studied in detail for having a better understanding of the concept.

Core Paper 3

Title: Larkin, I., Pierce, L. and Gino, F. (2012). ‘The psychological costs of pay?for?performance: Implications for the strategic compensation of employees’. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), pp.1194-1214.

Rationale

The selection reason of this paper is that it explains all the theoretical aspects that enhance the current understanding of pay for performance. This paper focuses on different theoretical aspects and then explains the best one.

Summary of Context and Findings

Most of the strategies of compensation are based on agency theory of economics. This paper argues on the many psychological factors including pay for performance that are neglected by the agency theory in analysing compensation. This paper explains how individual pay for performance is effected by psychological cost (social comparison, overconfidence). A theoretical framework was built that explains more productive ways of using performance based pay. It states that compensation is not only a motivating activity it has also effects on group work and firm’s productivity. This paper generated a projected a new integrated theory for compensation. This theory was based on literature from both economics and psychology. Agency theory is the most dominant one utilised for determining compensation strategy. In economic theory problem associated with agency theory includes skill, efforts and outcome that impact effectiveness of compensation strategy. The researcher argued on insights for development of compensation strategy and developed a framework that considered two factors of agency theory (effort provision, sorting mechanisms) along with psychological factors. Two psychological cost were consider comprising social comparison and overconfidence cost that effects the performance of individuals as well as firms. Their findings suggest that utilising these two factors in compensation strategy are likely to have a positive impact on the performance. They suggest that managers should consider social comparison cost and overconfidence cost while making a compensation strategy to achieve the desired outcomes.

Research Methodology Analysis

Regarding methodology which is adopted for this research; this research is based on the systematic review of the previous studies about the psychological and economic costs of pay for performance. The previous studies are reviewed with the attempt to present an integrated framework along with propositions. Indeed, research studies of similar studies usually adopt similar methodology but it is always encouraged to provide precise details about the selection criteria of selected methods. This research study lagged behind in this aspect as researchers could not provide sufficient information about the systematic review of previous studies.

Comparison with other related papers

This paper in comparison to others is beneficial as it gives the details of theories that are associated with pay for performance and other additions made by the authors are also helpful for the research work. The differentiated aspect of this research paper lies in the notion that psychological context has been considered in investigation of effectiveness of pay for performance (Doran et al., 2014; Hewitt, 2012). There are limited studies which have linked psychological cost based on sound theoretical consideration (Della Torre, Giangreco and Maes, 2014) and it has suggested that inclusion of social comparison, overconfidence can generate positive benefits of pay for performance, making this paper different from similar studies. However, some flaws in methodology might lower its validity in comparison to other research studies which have relied on more valid and strong theoretical approach.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the basis of compensation strategy and performance based pay lie in agency theory. Majority of the individuals utilises it to make compensation policies but one should add psychological cost as well to achieve desired results.

Core Paper 4

Title: Frey, B., Homberg, F. and Osterloh, M. (2013). Organizational Control Systems and Pay-for-Performance in the Public Service. Organization Studies, 34(7), pp.949-972.

Rationale

This research paper is somewhat like the above one but in different settings, it focuses on theoretical aspect of pay for performance and organisational control system in public sector. This paper will also enhance the theoretical knowledge of researcher that will contribute in research work. Insight from public sector might help to investigate any differences in private and public sectors, in terms of effectiveness of pay for performance.

Summary of Context and Findings

This paper argues that in different circumstances pay for performance has negative impact on the organisational outcomes and it was found more in public sector than in private. Authors utilises behavioural economics and management control theory to find out those circumstances. They find out a lack of theoretical basics in management of public services. Researchers lay emphasis on using a strong theoretical basis in governmental organisations. In utilises behavioural economics, principal agent theory was used to investigate the comprehensiveness of system modification as this theory holds strong empirical basis. This theory can be used along with two factors intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Principal agent theory lack psychological basis that should be adopted by public services. Utilisation of this theory results in the fact that to adopt an applicable pay for performance strategy public sector should have to differentiate different tasks. In this regard management control theory was applied that aids in differentiation of takes i.e. efficient control system that gives productive results. New public management should be adopted that consider control system and applicable performance based pay in a way to achieve outcomes. Moreover, to motivate public services inclusion of rewards, justice and performance based pay is vital; all these can be adopted by having strong theoretical base.

Research Methodology Analysis

Like previous study, this research has adopted the methodology of systematic review of literature where no further details about methods were provided. This limitation of incomplete details on selection criteria might lead to lowering the validity of study. However, in spite of this limitation, the initial aim and objectives were accomplished.

Comparison with other related papers

This paper in comparison with other explains two different theories that incorporate pay for performance in public sector setting. It enlightens new public management practices that can enhance the performance. The differentiated aspect of paper is associated with its ability to offer recommendations to public sector in the light of theory. Based on the findings of this study, the public sector construction and project management companies might become able to effectively modify their internal business practices for generating highly effective results in the form of enhanced performance (Brehm, Imberman and Lovenheim, 2017). The study has addressed aspect of justice in addition to other criteria for generating effectiveness of pay for performance and this aspect is making it suitable study to rely on for generating greater effectiveness (Gadde and Dubois, 2010; Hartmann and Slapni?ar, 2012; Hon, 2012). 

Conclusion

Summing up, public services focus on employee betterment through bettering condition but case is almost different. This study shows that to gain richer understanding of firms’ performance management control theory along with principle agent theory should be used to measure performance outcomes.

 

Section 3: Conclusions

Reward system and pay for performance are significant aspects for the productive results of the firm. It was found in literature that pay for performance is for motivating employees in groups and in diverse cultures. As firms’ productivity is dependent upon performance of employees and employees do not work for free; they demand rewards and pay as per their performance, therefore, the importance of this aspect could not be overlooked in any sector involving construction projects. The findings from the core research articles have offered mixed views. For instance, the research of Gerhart and Fang (2014 has provided that in order to generate positive benefits of pay for performance and reward system, it is crucial for business to align with specific context. The differing consequences of pay for performance have been suggested in different settings, with different cultural aspects. Thus, this study has maintained that pay for performance might not offer same results in different settings. In similar way, the study of Eijkenaar, Emmert, Scheppach and Schöffski (2013) has mentioned that the effects of pay for performance can be continual as well as weak based on the specific aspects of the social groups in which system is implemented. For instance, in socioeconomic groups, results were weak and they were substantial in some other settings. These results are align with the study of Gerhart and Fang (2014) to some extent as both have mentioned that pay for performance effects might not remain same in different contexts.

Additionally, by moving further to the results of Larkin, Pierce and Gino (2012), it was found that by reflecting upon the agency theory, the two main factors can be considered as of substantial importance for generating positive effects of pay for performance. The two factors highlighted in this study were; social comparison and overconfidence. Thus study has suggested ways through which positive effects of pay for performance can be generated. Finally, the results of Frey, Homberg and Osterloh (2013) have focused more on public sector and offered that pay for performance has adverse consequences in public sector in comparison to private sector. It has also offered that by relying on adoption of public management, public sector businesses can generate positive benefits of pay for performance.

All of these research findings have substantial implications for practice. Although the results are from different sectors of economy, yet they can be implemented in construction sector in project management setting with an aim of making decisions regarding development of reward system and pay for performance of businesses. All of the core papers have mentioned some important suggestions, such as by relying on agency theory factors, construction firms can foster positive consequences of pay for performance. Along with this, it is also notable that by relying upon the results of these core papers, construction professionals can align their culture and other specific contexts of the organisations with their rewards system with an aim of generating positive effects of pay for performance.

Moreover, based on the results of core papers, it can be seen that the pay for performance has insights in different sectors like healthcare, however the construction project management sector is unexplored. Theoretical foundations of pay for performance depict that it is an important aspect in getting fruitful results from employees. Many other research studies also depict that pay for performance and reward system has a strong association and it is a matter that should be considered by the researchers. The future researchers can specifically focus on the aspect of pay for performance within construction industry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References (Part A)

Brynjolfsson, E. and McAfee, A. (2012). Race against the machine: How the digital revolution is accelerating innovation, driving productivity, and irreversibly transforming employment and the economy. Brynjolfsson and McAfee.

Butcher, D.C. and Sheehan, M.J. (2010). ‘Excellent contractor performance in the UK construction industry’. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 17(1), pp.35-45.

Drucker, P. (2013). People and performance. Routledge.

Gadde, L.E. and Dubois, A. (2010). ‘Partnering in the construction industry—Problems and opportunities’. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 16(4), pp.254-263.

Hartmann, F. and Slapni?ar, S. (2012). ‘Pay fairness and intrinsic motivation: the role of pay transparency’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(20), pp.4283-4300.

Hon, A.H. (2012). ‘When competency-based pay relates to creative performance: The moderating role of employee psychological need’. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), pp.130-138.

Sauermann, H. and Stephan, P. (2013). ‘Conflicting logics? A multidimensional view of industrial and academic science’. Organisation Science, 24(3), pp.889-909.

Sekaran, U. (2006). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Shields, J., Brown, M., Kaine, S., Dolle-Samuel, C., North-Samardzic, A., McLean, P., Johns, R., Robinson, J., O'Leary, P. and Plimmer, G. (2015). Managing Employee Performance & Reward: Concepts, Practices, Strategies. Cambridge University Press.

Van De Voorde, K., Paauwe, J. and Van Veldhoven, M. (2012). ‘Employee well?being and the HRM–organisational performance relationship: a review of quantitative studies’. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(4), pp.391-407.

 

References (Part B)

Core articles

Eijkenaar, F., Emmert, M., Scheppach, M. and Schöffski, O. (2013). ‘Effects of pay for performance in health care: a systematic review of systematic reviews’. Health policy, 110(2), pp.115-130.

Frey, B., Homberg, F. and Osterloh, M. (2013). Organizational Control Systems and Pay-for-Performance in the Public Service. Organization Studies, 34(7), pp.949-972.

Gerhart, B. and Fang, M. (2014). ‘Pay for (individual) performance: Issues, claims, evidence and the role of sorting effects’. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), pp.41-52.

Larkin, I., Pierce, L. and Gino, F. (2012). ‘The psychological costs of pay?for?performance: Implications for the strategic compensation of employees’. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), pp.1194-1214.

 

References (Supporting)

Blinder, A.S. ed. (2011). Paying for productivity: A look at the evidence. Brookings Institution Press.

 Brehm, M., Imberman, S.A. and Lovenheim, M.F. (2017). ‘Achievement effects of individual performance incentives in a teacher merit pay tournament.’ Labour Economics, 8(7), pp. 78-91

Della Torre, E., Giangreco, A. and Maes, J. (2014). ‘Show me the money! Pay structure and individual performance in golden teams’. European Management Review, 11(1), pp.85-100.

Doran, T., Kontopantelis, E., Reeves, D., Sutton, M. and Ryan, A.M. (2014). ‘Setting performance targets in pay for performance programmes: what can we learn from QOF?’. British Medical Journal, 348, pp. 78-91

Drucker, P. (2013). People and performance. Routledge.

Gadde, L.E. and Dubois, A. (2010). ‘Partnering in the construction industry—Problems and opportunities’. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 16(4), pp.254-263.

Hartmann, F. and Slapni?ar, S. (2012). ‘Pay fairness and intrinsic motivation: the role of pay transparency’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(20), pp.4283-4300.

Hewitt, A. (2012). ‘2012 Trends in global employee engagement’. Aon Corporation. Retrieved August, 11, p.2013.

Hon, A.H. (2012). ‘When competency-based pay relates to creative performance: The moderating role of employee psychological need’. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), pp.130-138.

Jirjahn, U. (2015). Performance pay and productivity: The moderating role of a high-wage policy (No. 4/15). Research Papers in Economics.

Kondo, K.K., Damberg, C.L., Mendelson, A., Motu’apuaka, M., Freeman, M., O’Neil, M., Relevo, R., Low, A. and Kansagara, D. (2016). ‘Implementation processes and pay for performance in healthcare: a systematic review’. Journal of general internal medicine, 31(1), pp.61-69.

McDonald, R., 2014. ‘Paying for performance in healthcare organisations’.  Journal of Business Studies, 7(1), pp. 788-799