中心李绍龙博士及其合作者在Academy of Management Journal发表论文“When Does Pay for Performance Motivate Employee Helping Behavior? The Contextual Influence of Performance Subjectivity”。Academy of Management Journal是美国管理学会的旗舰期刊，是“UTD-24”目录所列顶级期刊之一。
Abstract：An extensive body of literature demonstrates the incentive effect by which pay for performance (PFP) motivates employees’ in-role task performance. Nonetheless, scholars have also posited that PFP is likely to demotivate employees’ extra-role behaviors. Drawing upon expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) and the heuristic processing literature (Kahneman, 2011), we examine the relationship between PFP and employee helping behavior. We perform this examination not only by considering the “pay” component (e.g., PFP intensity) but also by scrutinizing the “performance” component, namely, performance subjectivity, which refers to the extent to which the criteria or indicators used to measure employee performance in the performance appraisal system are subjective. Specifically, we propose that PFP has a conditional positive effect (i.e., in the context of high performance subjectivity) on employee helping behavior and further theorize and test the underlying psychological mechanism by which individual perceived helping-performance expectancy accounts for the interactive effects between PFP and performance subjectivity on employee helping behavior. The empirical results of three studies employing distinctive methodologies provide general support for our hypotheses. Taken together, our research challenges the conventional wisdom that PFP undermines employees’ extra-role behaviors by providing new insight into understanding when and why PFP motivates employee helping behavior.
Keywords: Pay for performance; Helping behavior; Performance subjectivity; Heuristic processing; Performance management
Citation: He, W., Li, S. L., Feng J., Zhang G., & Sturman M. C. (2021). When Does Pay for Performance Motivate Employee Helping Behavior? The Contextual Influence of Performance Subjectivity. Academy of Management Journal, 64: 293-326. Doi: 10.5465/amj.2018.1408
