Compensation is considered worldwide as one of the main strategies of human resource management. In Chile, human resources executive psychologists have been faced with multiple requirements from organizations in this area and our training did not provide us with the concepts or techniques to give satisfactory answers.
This article describes the functions of compensation, presents the compensation management model developed from practice, reflects on the contribution of organizational psychologists as compensation managers and reviews the current challenges for those of us who work on the important issue of compensation.
The basic core of any organizational system is the relationship between the person and the organization. If we assume that this relationship is established to the extent that the person contributes her work in exchange for something valuable to receive in return, we see that the concept of compensation, far from playing a merely instrumental role, constitutes rather a determining factor of the. very existence of the organization.
It is curious, therefore, to note that in practice this topic is usually conceptualized as a mere instrumental problem of monetary quantification of remuneration and benefits, missing the opportunity to define, position, manage and administer compensation from its strategic place..
Organizational practice indicates that it is the human resources executives who should be the experts on the issues of remuneration and benefits. Managers, headquarters and workers expect these experts to know with what level of salary to hire, with what criteria to increase fixed remuneration, how to incentivize through variable payment, how to associate performance with remuneration, and a series of operational issues related to accounting and tax payment. income.
Psychologists who have assumed executive responsibilities have been confronted with these types of compensation and benefit allocation decisions that we were not taught to manage. As you go along, and through trial and error, you learn to pay salaries and understand the subject, with a general feeling of being an annoying, unwanted operational function and that it downplays the most typical work in the area.
Sometimes you hear comments of the type "I did not study for this" or "it will have to be done, to later work on important human resources issues." Thus, a certain disregard for the topic of "remuneration" is being built, considering it to be either an overly operational topic, typical of accountants and administrators, or an excessively mercantile topic in terms of the exchange of work for remuneration. Even visions have been raised in which the person-organization relationship is judged as a commodification of the link (Rodríguez, 2001), reducing the issue of compensation to a mere problem of pesos more or pesos less. These perspectives are partial and do not consider the significant positive organizational effects of compensation for the company and the worker.
In this generic scenario, we find psychologists who do not know about compensation, who carry a prejudice of disdain with the subject or a disqualification for its commercial tone, and who face great organizational pressure to give concrete answers to everyday recruitment problems., salary increases, collective bargaining, forms of payment that pay as little as possible, layoffs, or how to motivate staff.
We should not be very surprised by this lack of academic compensation training if we consider that the incorporation of psychology into organizational logic has obeyed more practical and instrumental than strategic criteria. It is mainly from the perspective of organizational behavior that psychologists begin to find a space within organizations. What motivated this approach was the need for executives to get answers to questions such as how to ensure that we enter staff with the right profile? How to improve people's abilities to do their job better? How to motivate staff more? How to improve internal communications? How to enhance the leadership of our supervisors?
And even when the space has been created to intervene from a more global and strategic point of view in a logic of organizational development, the expectation of the executives is that the role of the psychologist is focused on trying to minimize the negative impacts that may come to generate the implemented changes and help to make the transition of this whole process more bearable.
The great need for help in all of these topics makes it easy to visualize the urgency of addressing them. Hence, it is not by chance that universities are concerned with preparing the organizational psychologist to cope with appropriate tools for these requirements. But since the strategic importance of the compensation theme is not usually visualized and the need to provide it with a psychological vision in its definition of policies, management and administration, it is definitely not incorporated as a subject of study in training programs.
Thus, without undergraduate training in compensation, psychologists have had to learn in practice the conceptualization and techniques of compensation, to satisfy what organizations and our bosses demand of us. And we have found surprises.
Compensation Functions
The 4 functions of the compensations are the following:
- Strategic alignment.
Remuneration and benefits are a privileged means to directly associate the goals and values of an organization with the motivation and performance of workers. Workers know how to “translate” what is being paid and what is expected of them through their work. Compensation is an unquestionable means of communication, since the inconsistencies that a person perceives between organizational discourse and work practice will be resolved through their interpretation of what compensation connotes: what is actually paid (Lawler, 1990).
In several companies we have found organizational missions that consider teamwork as a central value axis. However, the remuneration is individual, it is not associated with team goals, nor does it vary income according to group efforts. Given this obvious inconsistency, the worker "believes" the ideas behind the concrete: the payment of his salary.
The effort should be not so much in declaring values but in practically transmitting them through the few organizational means that no worker questions. And compensation occupies a privileged place among them.
In this way, compensation must be a matter of delicate reflection, planning and direction, acquiring a strategic sense in that the organization must show its employees what it wants to achieve and how they contribute to achieving global goals. This approach contradicts the belief of some people about the intrinsic motivating power of money and the idea widely disseminated by Herzberg, who positioned remuneration as a hygienic factor and a non-motivating floor of job performance (Rodríguez, 2001).
It is interesting to note that compensation has both characteristics: linked to the satisfaction of basic needs, it is not motivating and, on that individual cut-off point, it mobilizes motivation towards higher performances that seek achievement and recognition. There is a very motivating part of compensation and it is relevant to establish it because, in addition to being consistent with what working people feel, it demystifies the widely generalized concept that money does not motivate (Gross, 1995).
This relationship between the organization's goals and the motivation and performance of the people, united through compensations, is the function of strategic alignment. If people are paid for increased production, cost savings, compliance with sales goals, budgets or deadlines, they will clearly understand how they should adjust their performance to the company's expectations and the dissonances between discourse and practice will be reduced. of work. The worker knows what he has to do and it will be the task of the organizations to carry out a professional management of compensations to administer the competences of the people, showing them in practical terms, what goals are valued.
At the base of the above, there is the dependence of the achievement of the organizational goals regarding the performance of the workers. Ultimately, it is they who achieve or not achieve the desired results, which sets people up as the asset with the greatest impact on companies. As Ridderstrale and Nordstrom (2000) propose, it is talent that moves capital, so the earlier organizations translate this idea into compensation systems that align the performance and competencies of people with the goals of the organization, the better results they will achieve..
- Internal equity.
Another function of compensation is to pay based on the impact of each charge on business results. For this, it is necessary to evaluate said impact through job evaluation techniques that guarantee a fair and systematic look at all positions in the organization. What is equitable is that the same set of variables and the same units of measurement are used to weigh the relative importance of all the positions. Equity is in it and not, as some people believe, that the evaluation results are homogeneous.
The objective is to evaluate with the greatest objectivity, based on the responsibilities of each position, their effect on organizational goals. For this, there are various job evaluation systems, in our opinion being the quantitative systems in general and the system developed by Edward Hay and Dale Purves in particular (Henderson, 1985), which guarantee a reliable measure of internal equity.
The level of remuneration meets several objectives, and one of them is to pay at the beginning a remuneration proportional to what a person is expected to contribute from a particular position.
Since the total remuneration is the sum of payment for the position and payment for results, the internal equity associated with the position is a central criterion when hiring a person, since, since their actual performance is unknown, they are paid according to the value of salary assigned to the position. Therefore, equity is decisive in a person's income. It is not possible to take a look of "equal wages at equal charges" over the years, as incomes will naturally differ according to the best or worst result achieved by each worker. The growth of remuneration is associated with own merits.
- External competitiveness.
The compensations must allow the hiring and maintenance of the personnel that the organization requires. For this, it is necessary to look at the market and establish what level of remuneration is sought to position itself. If you do not pay what the comparative market pays or you do not dynamically manage the compensations to adjust to the increases in the demand of the labor market, the probability of not finding the needed talents, of lamented rotation and of damage to the organizational efficiency is high.
It is standard practice for companies to have surveys of the remuneration market, to permanently test their relative position. This practice is positive, to the extent that it is understood that remuneration must satisfy not only the criterion of external competitiveness, but at the same time must ensure internal equity.
In other words, it may happen that due to seasonality factors, due to expansions of certain types of industries or due to a shortage of supply of some type of professional or technician, the market increases the remuneration for a position. If the company decides to hire such a professional at that time and is only governed by the criterion of competitiveness, it will pay the market value that it deems appropriate. If within the company there is a person in the same position but who was incorporated at a time when the market paid less rent, internal inequality is established and the company has a latent problem.
This example shows that remuneration should always be the result of the combination of the criteria of internal equity and external competitiveness, which highlights the general error of many professionals who believe that one should only pay by market.
There are nuances to the above for the retention strategies of key executives, who behave differently since the comparison criterion is usually not the market, but what we call emotional compensation, that is, if I consider myself a key executive for the company, I hope they reward me "as I deserve" and the organization treats me as someone especially important. In other words, in these exceptional situations the criteria for determining compensation are subjective, individual and with an emphasis on those aspects that each executive values. This interesting topic will be addressed in another article.
- Performance management.
Related to the strategic alignment function, the design of the compensations must guarantee that the performance of the people is oriented to what the company expects. This attributes an individual and particular character to the compensations, since they must consider the type of work of the person, the expected results of their position and how to reward them for the demonstrated achievements, both in terms of remuneration and non-pecuniary rewards.
The performance of people is conceived as the most relevant asset that the management must manage, and must establish contingent acknowledgments and corrections in the face of deviations from expected performance. This idea of performance management is novel compared to the general practice of annual performance evaluation. Here performance management is daily, which although it has a final impact on the definition of remuneration levels, is positioned as a management strategy towards performance improvements and the practice of coaching as support and support for people (Chingos, 1997).
For many companies, performance is one of the main criteria for making fixed-income increases through merit matrices, however, each day the performance associated with compensation translates into measurable indicators of compensation and the payment of variable incentives. As Becker, Huselid, and Ulrich (2001) comment, there are systematic efforts to objectify measurable human resource indicators, subjects traditionally difficult to measure, which over time are expected to replace subjective performance evaluations and their less stimulating effects on motivation. people, which goes in the opposite direction of directing performance towards organizational goals and needs.
It is clear that performance is giving rise to two strategies with different and complementary purposes: on the one hand, it seeks to objectify performance on measurable indicators to define variable incentive systems associated with results and, on the other, it seeks to establish a supervisory relationship system -supervised anchored in the improvement of the worker's personal skills. It is necessary that those who run organizations, in general, and human resources professionals, in particular, make this distinction because it allows an organizational decision that includes consideration of results, improvement of skills, and the employability of people.
Summarizing the functions of the compensations, each organization must answer key questions to know how efficiently it is handling the issue, namely:
- How does the compensation structure align with the values and business strategy? How do you attract and keep the right staff? Is the compensation oriented to internal equity, external competitiveness or both? Is there a clear association between remuneration and measurement of results? How do you stimulate staff to develop new skills? How does remuneration relate to activities that add value?
Compensation Management Model
It is clear that the way of designing and directing the compensations must satisfy the objectives of strategic alignment, internal equity, external competitiveness and performance management. This, linked to the general functions of human resources administration, namely obtaining, maintaining, developing and disconnecting people, generates specific techniques and tools that account for these ideas in practice.
Below we present the compensation management model that we have created in our consultancies to companies and that give a good account of the real requirements of organizations to human resources professionals and how to solve them.
Compensation management model.
Compensation Management Model
It is not the subject of this article to examine in detail the conceptualization, methodology and practical effects of the aforementioned compensation techniques, but only to show the reader the breadth and complexity of a highly significant topic.
Now we must ask ourselves, what are the differentiating advantages that organizational psychologists can offer as compensation managers, compared to other human resources professionals. Or is being a psychologist indifferent to the administration of compensation ?.
Contributions of the organizational psychologist as compensation manager.
There is a close relationship between psychology and compensation, as the latter is one of the favorite ways that organizations use or should use to value the contribution of their workers: remuneration for their work. It is necessary to understand the compensations and their emotional and motivational effects on people as a causal antecedent of the promotion of work performance aligned with the organizational goals and the satisfaction of the people.
In this regard, it is interesting to invite a reflection to relate the development of the motivational theories of Maslow, Herzberg, Mc Gregor and Vroom with the effects of compensations. Undoubtedly, it is Herzberg's motivational theory that best explains the organizational applications of motivation, and allows us to visualize the hygienic and motivating factors of work, with the conceptual exception that we commented earlier regarding that compensation has a double meaning: hygienic as satisfying basic needs and motivating in relation to the achievement of goals and the recognition associated with it.
In this context, the contributions of psychologists are in our opinion the following:
- Manage compensation as one of the main tools for assigning meaning to work. As Hopenhayn (2001) states, it is fundamental for personal identity to assign a meaningful meaning to one's work, which becomes particularly important in a society where work constitutes the main form of relationship with the world.
Relating personal compensation to the strategic sense and purpose of an organization allows people to feel part of it, understand what value the company assigns to their contribution, feel valued and important as a person who contributes, and reframe personal motivation in relation to the organization.
In this way, the development of intrinsic personal motivations is allowed, which are those that account for outstanding and sustained performances. This idea is far from the belief of money as an extrinsic motivator or, as it is colloquially commented, for people to work it is necessary to "have a carrot". Extrinsic strategies achieve short-term results and their effects are extinguished as soon as "the carrot" is no longer stimulating.
For this reason, the consolidation of the deep relationship between compensations as an expression of the sense and values of the organization and the sense of individual work, will allow the development of intrinsic individual motivations, solid and not very permeable to external conditions. It is to fertilize the terrain of personal vital sense as a maintainer of work performance (Fernández, 2001).
The process of attribution of meaning to one's own work responds to individual content and themes, so the organizational effort is not to guide the contents of individual motivation but to establish the importance for the company of each person's contribution to the sense of purpose of the organization, from the responsibilities of his position.
Naturally, this also emphasizes how clear, developed and ethically valuable the goals of some organizations are, and on the awareness of executives about their responsibility to assign a sense of purpose to the work of their collaborators. All of us who work seek to assign an existential meaning to work and, to the extent that this exists, my commitment, quality of work and persistence of performance will be better than if I only feel I am fulfilling a task that I find difficult to understand what importance and meaning it has for business.
As Peters and Waterman (1984) propose, we all want to be important and be recognized as the best, and that emotional need is an intrinsic motivation for work, however rationality shows us that being the best is not always possible. The accent is placed on the importance of the consideration and existential sense of people as a psychological need that demands to be considered, channeled and administered by companies, not only due to the altruistic effects of this, but also because of its direct relationship with the achievement of organizational results at the level of individual performance. Let's not forget that talent is what moves capital and not the other way around.
- Adjust compensation strategies to required organizational designs and existing work cultures.
Flannery, Hofrichter and Platten (1997) raise the concept of dynamic compensation, establishing that compensation strategies must be dynamically aligned to the different types of working culture prevailing in an organization. They distinguish four types of work cultures - functional culture, process culture, time-based culture, and network culture - each of which is characterized by differentiating work attributes. Working in a stable functional structure with high specialization and division of labor as typically seen in industries and mining is different than working in an advertising agency focused on maximizing contingent customer satisfaction.Or work as a scientist in a laboratory focused on researching new drugs or as a software development engineer. Thinking about work situations and cultures as different as those mentioned, makes it clear that different compensation strategies must be associated with each one, adjusted to the type of work performed.
The role of the psychologist is to identify the types of work culture existing in the organization and to design specific remuneration strategies that will best promote aligned performance. At the base of this is the concept of adjustment and organizational consistency developed by Lawrene and Lorsch (Rodríguez, 2001): to each prevailing work culture some compensation strategies correspond. Or in other words: there will be as many compensation systems as there are specific work cultures in an organization.
Psychologists in our role as agents of organizational change (Ulrich, 1997) must be clear that every time adjustments are made to organizational design, no matter how small or small, we have the responsibility to examine whether the changes generated merit an impact on the work culture that translates into adjustments to the compensation system. If this is not done, inconsistencies like those we have observed in some companies in which quality circles or high-performance groups were established in the logic of self-administered organizational cells occur, and the compensation structure was not modified. The logic of payment by functions was maintained, when the focus was clearly transferred to payment by results.
With the above, the concept that forms and structures of compensation are developed only once and then maintained is demystified. It is an organizational necessity to adjust them dynamically according to the growth needs of companies and the change in prevailing work cultures.
- Examine new forms of compensation aimed at stimulating personal motivation of employees and their transfer towards good job performance.
Along the same lines of implementing dynamic compensation strategies, we see a progressive need in companies to identify what are the motivations and sources of valuation of people, since psychologically they expect to be rewarded with the most highly valued means on a personal level.
Although this situation would become difficult to manage if it were applied to all workers, its progressive implementation is carried out with the people considered key within a company, these being understood by those who demonstrate competencies that guarantee the best possible sustainability of the factors of an organization's success in the long term. This tends to be associated with management-level positions where the management of uncertainty and sound business decisions in a highly changing scenario are essential assets.
This is associated with the change in the foci of work identity that Abarzúa (1994) observed and that realize that people's commitment is no longer with a company, a profession, or an age group: it is with themselves. People will be where they feel they need to be as a way to appropriate their personal career direction based on the ideal of the working self.
In other words, organizations should identify and deliver the conditions for personal career development, and be skilled in retaining the most talented. The concept of employability accounts for this phenomenon from the perspective of companies: it is no longer possible to ensure job stability, so it offers to increase people's employment capacity through training and professional development plans, among others.
The central question remains: what motivates people and how, through compensation, can we direct their contribution and performance towards what the organization needs? It is the job of psychologists to research in their organizations to provide culturally contingent and meaningful answers to these questions.
- Ensure fairness in compensation decisions. Although the application of job evaluation techniques and the design of optimal remuneration structures ensure the payment of compensation based on internal equity and external competitiveness, there are not a few occasions in which we have been faced with the temptation to Some executives arbitrarily change the categorization of a position to pay better compensation to a specific person.
As the person who makes such changes normally has greater organizational power than the human resources executive, one is in the dilemma of letting it go and avoiding problems, or of showing that in the long term this will generate greater administration difficulties due to the inequity that is incubated.
In this regard, an important contribution of psychologists is to show the effects of wage inequality and its relationship with union relations, and to generate the distinction that it is possible to raise a salary without altering the equitable basis of the remuneration structure. We have already commented that the compensation is made up of payment to the charge and payment by results, so that the increases in income for outstanding contributions must be made establishing policies of remunerative growth within the salary band of the charge, without altering the structure of charges technically constructed as guarantor of internal equity.
All of us who work in organizations know that workers constantly compare their salaries and spend time analyzing how and what is paid. In common language, there is frequent talk of injustices, hidden criteria for the administration of remuneration, little consideration for people's work and, in a rather union lexicon, impairment of personal dignity.
Like it or not, this is part of the labor reality, so the responsible company must assume these facts and establish clear and equitable administration systems. And the professional compensation management described ensures transparency, fairness and establishes a clear floor for labor relations.
- Openly communicate the compensation design and decision criteria: It is a permanent question in organizations whether or not to communicate how it is paid. Our experience indicates that the vast majority of companies do not communicate how the compensation system is structured, since they are aware of the errors, inequities and discretionary powers with which remuneration is administered. On the other hand, and despite this awareness, there is no desire to establish technically efficient and clear systems due to the usual fantasy that this will generate higher personnel costs or greater union pressure on remuneration. It is not detected that a professional compensation system allows the normal growth of salaries to be managed and opportunities for strategic alignment and direction of employee performance are lost.
Those organizations that have implemented professional compensation systems know the positive effects of openly informing how the remuneration and variable incentive systems were designed, and what are the compensation policies.
These effects are the reduction of dissonances produced by the inconsistency between what is declared by the organization and what is implemented in practice, the demonstration of respect for workers through the transparency of the compensation system as a necessary condition for a climate of favorable labor relations, and strengthening leadership and organizational credibility by knowing that compensation is clearly being managed. The workers may disagree with the criteria and policies established by the organization, but they will not question the intentions of the executives, who in a confrontational logic are always supposed to be hidden, obscure and oriented to harm workers.
Present challenges.
What is described implies attractive challenges for Chilean organizational psychologists, who we invite you to take on with energy to be a contribution to your organizations, give a coherent response to workers, and strengthen your personal existential sense regarding the contribution of your own work.
- Extend the concept of compensation and its effects on people and organizations: after what has been said, it is natural to adjust the perspective and conceptualization of compensation in those colleagues whose previous concept was that of disqualification or little consideration of the subject. We hope to stimulate reflection regarding the contribution of the organizational psychologist as an agent of alignment between the goals of organizations and the performance of people. Link own work to organizational goals: Undergraduate training is rich in strategies that executives from other areas describe as “soft”. This reflects a perception regarding the contribution of psychologists in companies: they worry about things of the second order and not the most important thing. We will not analyze the errors of consideration of the contribution of human resources in other professionals, since the modification of these ideas is beyond our scope of action. What is in our hands is to relate our own work to organizational goals, identifying how it can contribute in terms of demonstrable results to organizational achievement.
It is an imperative to leave the human resources plot to become business men and women, involved in all variables of the business and the market. The economic resources assigned to compensation are conceived as costs that must be attended to and controlled. And here there is a great opportunity to position yourself as professionals who handle "hard data" linked to the progress of the business.
In this regard, it seems essential to position compensation as the first consolidation strategy as a human resources executive, as it is a validated and legitimized issue for company directors and managers. This legitimization will allow credibility in expert judgment and options will be opened to implement other human resource development strategies.
- Assume their own professional training on the subject: given that as of 2002 the universities have not become aware of the need to include compensation training in their undergraduate curricula, the responsibility for training in the subject is their own. In this regard, it is important to show the universities that their undergraduate and master courses must provide a solid conceptual and practical compensation training. Currently, in some human resources diplomas, a generic compensation training is provided, but it does not delve into the practice of compensation techniques. It teaches what to do but not how to do it. That is, when the psychologist faces, for example, the task of having to calculate a remuneration structure, in practice he will not know how to do it and must improvise.Train the executive teams in which the organizational psychologist participates: along the same lines, it is the responsibility of the executive psychologist of human resources to socialize their knowledge of compensation with other professionals, since it is a matter of permanent decision, of high impact, and with a very low baseline level of knowledge. Demonstrate technical and methodological rigor: the usually undervalued statistical training that psychologists receive, turns out to be a fundamental knowledge for compensation work. The correlation calculations between the behavior of the salaries of a company and those of the market, the polynomial regressions with which the optimal remuneration structure is determined and the mathematical management of descriptive statistical indicators are the basis of the technical and methodological rigor with which face this issue. In fact, in our consulting experience with several colleagues, it is interesting to note that for some it is the first time that they ponder their statistical training when seeing a practical application of it. Establish the direct relationship between personal performance and compensation: Another challenge is to persevere in paying for results, since this has deep roots in the psychology of human motivation and because it is ethically reasonable that those who make the best use of their talents and work better, earn more. The guarantee of equity must be in the hiring salaries, since thereafter salary growth through outstanding performance and contributions is a personal responsibility. Give transparency to the administration of the compensations, to the information to the workers about the policies and criteria of determination of the compensations and to the relationship with the union directives in the subjects of negotiation of remunerations and benefits.
Compensation is a privileged means of building values in organizational practice, being one of the most significant links between person and organization.
By means of a conscious professional management of the compensations it will be paid with equity, being the work a possible microscenario to demonstrate solidarity and equity in the remuneration; it will be paid for results, establishing the value of personal responsibility for the job and one's destiny; excellent performances will be associated with variable incentive systems, valuing the participation of workers in line with the goals of the organization; and the compensation decision criteria will be managed and communicated clearly and transparently, respecting the individual and collective relationship between people and workers.
It is time for organizational psychologists to reconceptualize our role as compensation executives as, most likely, the capital contribution of our work to the satisfaction of people and the achievement of organizational goals.
After all, we are not only called to contribute our psychological vision to try to answer questions and solve difficulties that arise as a consequence of the application of policies and executive decisions of high impact in organizational practice, but also to be able to contribute our know-how how in the very instance of definition of such policies and high impact decisions.
It is time to change our axis of organizational action from dedicating ourselves mainly to solving problems and managing consequences, towards assuming and playing an important role in defining organizational strategies and their causal factors, thus avoiding that many of those problems come to be generated and become in true organizational managers. As Ulrich (1997) concludes, we must position ourselves as strategic partners of our organizations and their internal clients.
References
- Abarzúa, E. (1994). A typology of new identities at work in Chile. Magazine of Economy and Work, year II, No. 4. Santiago, Chile.Becker, B., Huselid, M., & Ulrich, D. (2001). The Human Resources Scorecard. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Chingos, P. (1997). Paying for performance. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Fernández, I. (2001, Julio). Compensation trends in the Chilean market. Paper presented at the XXVIII Inter-American Congress of Psychology, Santiago, Chile, Flannery, T., Hofrichter, D. & Platten, P. (1997). People, performance and payment. Buenos Aires: Editorial Paidós.Gross, S. (1995). Compensation for teams. New York, NY: Amacom. Henderson, R. (1985). Compensation management. Reston, Virginia: Reston Publishing Company, Inc.Hopenhayn, M. (2001). Rethink work. Buenos Aires:Norma.Lawler Editorial Group, E. (1990). Strategic pay. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.Peters, T. & Waterman, R. (1984). In Search of Excellence. Colombia: Editorial Norma.Ridderstrale, J. & Nordstrom, K. (2000). Funky Business. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Rodríguez, D. (2001). Organizational Management. Santiago: Editions Universidad Católica de Chile.Ulrich, D. (1997). Champions Human Resources. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Granica.(1997). Champions Human Resources. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Granica.(1997). Champions Human Resources. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Granica.
THE ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST AS A COMPENSATION MANAGER
Contributed by: Ignacio Fernández - Ricardo Baeza Weinmann
Download the original file
