意外涨薪：激励员工的新方式？

    时至今日，薪酬预算还没有从经济衰退时期的宿醉中清醒过来，美国的年均工资涨幅依然徘徊在3%左右，难怪薪酬战略已经成为一个热门话题。那么，如何才能设计出一项足以激励员工全情投入工作的薪酬计划呢？日前，哈佛商学院(Harvard Business School)的3位研究人员提出了一个新奇的解决方案：雇佣新员工不久后，就给他们加薪。

    “以前的研究已经表明，支付超出员工预期的薪水可能会产生投桃报李的效果，员工的生产率有望大幅提升，”哈佛大学工商管理学教授迪帕克•马尔霍特拉指出。然而，他和他的同事们发现，更高的工资能否激发额外的努力，还要取决于涨工资是不是企业赠送给员工的“一件礼物，也就是说，你选择这样做纯粹是一种友好的表示，并没有任何附加条件。”

    马尔霍特拉和他的团队研究了oDesk公司的266位员工，这家全球性的自由职业者在线网络聘请他们从事一个为期4小时的一次性数据录入项目。所有新员工都来自发展中国家，3美元或4美元的时薪比他们以前挣的工资高了不少。

    研究人员把这些工人分成三个小组。第一组工人被告知，他们将领取3美元时薪。第二组最初也是以时薪3美元的工资水平招聘的，但在开始工作前，他们非常惊喜地获悉，这个项目出人意料地增加了预算，他们现在将获得4美元时薪。第三组从一开始就被给予4美元时薪，此后没有增加。

    即使第二组和第三组最终领取的薪酬完全相同，但相较于其他两组，第二组工作得更加卖力，产出也更高，大约多20%。此外，第二组工人也表现出最大的耐性。他们一直专心致志地从事手头的任务，在4小时临近结束之际的表现尤其出色。有意思的是，在这个高绩效组别中，经验相对丰富的工人的生产率也最高，显然是因为过往的工作经验让他们倍加感激这次难得一见的意外涨薪行为。

    马尔霍特拉指出，与世俗认知相反，更高的工资自身并没有推升生产率：从一开始就被给予4小时时薪的工人，并没有比那些以3美元时薪招募而来，随后获得3美元时薪的工人更努力地工作。

    他补充说，为了让薪酬计划产生最大的影响力，公司管理层或许不仅需要考虑向新员工支付多高的薪水，还需要仔细斟酌派发薪酬的时机。

    “关键是如何说明涨工资的原因，”他说。“我们的理论是，如果你明确表示，你选择加薪仅仅是因为你有能力这么做，人们将回报这种行为。如果你投之以桃，员工就将报之以李。”只有这样，发放额外的钱才能在最大程度上提升企业的生产率。（财富中文网）

    译者：叶寒                         

    With compensation budgets still suffering a post-recession hangover, and the average U.S. salary hike hovering around 3% a year, compensation strategy has become a hot topic. How do you design a pay plan that motivates people to do their best work? A new study by three Harvard Business School researchers suggests a novel answer: Shortly after you hire new workers, give them a raise.

    "Previous research has shown that paying people more than they expect may elicit reciprocity in the form of greater productivity," notes Deepak Malhotra, a Harvard business-administration professor who worked on the study. What he and his colleagues found, however, was that the connection between more pay and extra effort depends on presenting the increase "as a gift -- that is, as something you've chosen to do purely as a nice gesture, with no strings attached."

    Malhotra and his team studied 266 people hired by oDesk, a global online network of freelancers, to do a one-time data-entry project for four hours. All of the new hires were people in developing countries, for whom hourly wages of $3 and $4 were higher than what they had been making in previous jobs.

    The researchers split the group up into three parts. One group was told they would earn $3 an hour. A second group was initially hired at $3 an hour but, before they started working, they got a surprise: The budget for the project had expanded unexpectedly, they were told, and they would now be paid $4 an hour. The third group was offered $4 an hour from the start and given no increase.

    Even though the second and third groups were ultimately paid the same amount, the second group worked harder and produced more -- about 20% more -- than either of the other two. People in the second group also showed the most stamina, maintaining their focus all the way through the assigned task and performing especially well toward the end of the four hours. Interestingly, the more experienced employees in the high-performing group were the most productive of all, apparently because their previous work experience led them to appreciate the rarity of an unexpected raise.

    Contrary to conventional wisdom, Malhotra points out that higher pay, in and of itself, didn't boost productivity: People who made $4 an hour from the outset worked no harder than those who were hired at $3 and were then paid $3.

    To get the most impact from their pay plans, he adds, companies might consider not only what to pay new hires, but when to pay it.

    "The key thing is how you present [the reason for an increase]," he says. Doling out extra money could boost productivity most "if you make it clear that the pay raise is something you're choosing to do just because you can. Our theory is that people will reciprocate. If you do something nice, they'll do something nice back."