scholarly journals Evaluating Form and Functionality of Pay-for-Performance Plans: The Relative Incentive and Sorting Effects of Merit Pay, Bonuses, and Long-Term Incentives

2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 697-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanghee Park ◽  
Michael C. Sturman
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S744-S744
Author(s):  
Nicholas Castle ◽  
Lindsay Schwartz ◽  
David Gifford

Abstract The CoreQ (not an acronym) consists of a limited number of satisfaction items (3-4 items, depending on setting) that are used to create an overall satisfaction score for long-term care facilities. This measure has been used in assisted living (AL) and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and has been endorsed by the National Quality Forum (NQF). Briefly, the development and psychometric testing of the CoreQ will be described, including the rationale for producing an overall satisfaction score and correlation with important quality indicators like Five-Star. Using data collected over the past 3 years, comprising more than 100,000 respondents, the use of the CoreQ measure will be described. For example, the CoreQ scores are used in MA to allow providers to benchmark their performance. The use of the scores in this way will be discussed including how providers have used the scores for quality improvement. Some states have elected to use CoreQ in pay for performance and other state initiatives. A case study of how New Jersey uses CoreQ with SNFs will be presented, including distribution of scores and addressing data collection challenges. CoreQ can be utilized as a short customer satisfaction measure to allow providers to benchmark their performance, residents and families in decision-making, and states and others to use for accountability.


1994 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilbert B. Siegel

Three federal demonstration projects have been using monetary rewards for performance with mixed results. Two of the projects, Navy and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, use individual merit pay in research and development environments. A third, an Air Force project, involves blue collar employees, and utilizes gain sharing. This article analyzes evaluation research conducted to date. Results show it is difficult to separate pay outcomes from the effects of multiple interventions. However inconclusive, there is evidence that improvements have been produced without many of the side effects which have been described in the literature on pay-for-performance in the federal government.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 1005-1021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward C. Norton

1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brigitte W. Schay

This article compares the effects of two different pay-for-performance systems implemented as a result of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Analyses are based on responses to five annual attitude surveys administered between 1979 and 1984 to civilian employees at four Navy R&D laboratories. Two of the labs, located in California, implemented pay for performance for all their white collar employees under a CSRA demonstration project testing an integrated approach to pay performance appraisal and position classification. The other two labs, located on the East coast, served as a comparison group for the federal-wide merit pay system covering supervisors and managers. Overall results were found to be more positive for the two demonstration labs in California.


The Lancet ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 388 (10041) ◽  
pp. 268-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew M Ryan ◽  
Sam Krinsky ◽  
Evangelos Kontopantelis ◽  
Tim Doran

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon De Lusignan ◽  
Benjamin Sun ◽  
Christopher Pearce ◽  
Christopher Farmer ◽  
Paul Stevens ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document