Three Federal Demonstration Projects: Using Monetary Performance Awards

1994 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilbert B. Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Technology Use ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Merit Pay ◽  
Evaluation Research ◽  
Blue Collar ◽  
Gain Sharing ◽  
Monetary Rewards

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.

Can Pay for Performance Succeed in Government?

1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Perry ◽  
Beth Ann Petrakis
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Performance Management ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Merit Pay ◽  
Recognition System ◽  
Civil Service Reform ◽  
Current Program ◽  
Pay System

Pay-for-performance programs have become increasingly popular in recent years. The federal government introduced a merit pay system for managers under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. The failure of the system led to its reform in 1984. The current program, the Performance Management and Recognition System (PMRS), is described and assessed. The paper offers a prognosis for PMRS's future. Other public sector experience is reviewed to identify the probable success of managerial merit pay.

Effects of Performance-Contingent Pay on Employee Attitudes

1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brigitte W. Schay
Keyword(s):  
Performance Appraisal ◽  
East Coast ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Merit Pay ◽  
White Collar ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Employee Attitudes ◽  
Civil Service Reform ◽  
Civilian Employees

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.

Continuing the Exploration of African Americans in the Early History of Evaluation in the United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-274
Author(s):  
Stafford Hood
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Evaluation Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Society ◽  
Early History ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
History Of ◽  
Society Annual

This article, based on the remarks delivered by the author at the Eleanor Chelimsky forum at the Eastern Evaluation Research Society annual conference in 2016, discusses Ambrose Caliver, an evaluator of color who worked for the federal government during segregation. Caliver’s history is an important contribution to the evaluation tree. This article discusses Caliver’s contribution to our field and the importance of recognizing people of color within the history of evaluation.

COVID-19 Vaccine and Fitness to Fly

2021 ◽  
Vol 92 (9) ◽  
pp. 698-701
Author(s):  
Daniel Gabbai ◽  
Aya Ekshtein ◽  
Omer Tehori ◽  
Oded Ben-Ari ◽  
Shachar Shapira
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Injection Site ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Common Side Effect ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Dose Administration ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Site Pain ◽  
The U.S

INTRODUCTION: On December 2020 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. This new vaccine has several side effects that can potentially impair function, which warrants special attention regarding aircrews fitness to fly following vaccination.METHODS: A survey was conducted in the Israeli Air Force (IAF) Aeromedical Center in order to characterize the side effects and their duration following Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine administration to aviators.RESULTS: The most common side effect was injection site pain. Headache, chills, myalgia, fatigue, and weakness were more common following the second dose administration. The difference is statistically significant. Following the second vaccine, duration of side effects was longer compared to the first vaccine (P-value 0.002).CONCLUSION: The IAF Aeromedical center policy for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine recipients among aircrew members, based on side effects duration and severity, is to temporarily ground from flight duties for 24 and 48 h following the first and the second dose, respectively.Gabbai D, Ekshtein A, Tehori O, Ben-Ari O, Shapira S. COVID-19 vaccine and fitness to fly. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2021; 92(9):698701.

scholarly journals An Historical Perspective of Reward Systems: Lessons Learned from the Scientific Management Era

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene L. Caudill ◽  
Constance D. Porter
Keyword(s):  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Reward System ◽  
Profit Sharing ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Scientific Management ◽  
Reward Systems ◽  
Gain Sharing ◽  
Knowledge Based

This paper reveals how similar the reward systems prevalent during the scientific management era are to the rewards systems in use today. Systems popular today, such as profit sharing, gain sharing, skill/knowledge-based pay, merit-based pay/pay for performance, and variable-based pay, were also advocated during the reign of scientific management. The ideas expressed by several key scientific management contributors, including Frederick W. Taylor, Henry L. Gantt, Harrington Emerson, and Frank B and Lillian M. Gilbreth, are detailed. These ideas are compared and contrasted with existing reward systems and their underlying premises.  In addition, the lessons learned from the scientific management era as they relate to reward system philosophies of today are presented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document