Abstract
The article deals with contemporary executive’s rewards system in the Lithuanian public sector and its changes over time. This analysis includes high officials in civil service as well as heads of public service’s providers and managers of state-owned enterprises. The analysis bases on the reward dimension of the Public Service Bargains (PSBs) model which reflects different approaches to tangible and intangible reward elements. This theoretical approach is used to test the hypotheses that there is a clear public sector bargain on the executive’s rewards system, and this bargain was shaped by pre-planned reforms in the public sector. The analysis of the legal framework of the tangible reward system explains how egalitarian bargain was consolidated in the fragmented public service system, and pre-planned reforms added some hierarchical and individualistic elements to this system. The assessment of the Lithuanian public sector executives’ tangible rewards in the international context, differentiation among different types of Lithuanian public sector organizations and inside organisations itself provides clear evidences that the egalitarian reward type dominates in the Lithuanian public service. The refusal by politicians to align the reward system periodically with changes in economic conditions during growth times also strengthens this egalitarian element. Recent public deliberations allow to assess how divergent are approaches by politicians and high public officials to the contemporary executive’s reward system. On the one side, there is a broad political coalition which in a consistent way supports the egalitarian approach to the executive’s reward system. On the other side, high civil service officials follow the logic of the hierarchical system and use judicial measures to protect their interests. An overview of the intangible reward elements in the Lithuanian public sector also shows supporting evidence to the egalitarian reward system. In this context, notable is the failure to introduce a clear career path as the key element of the hierarchical system. This article concludes that the Lithuanian public sector executive reward system can be regarded as egalitarian and was largely shaped by incremental policy decisions, changes in economic conditions, and court decisions but not by pre-planned reforms.
Highlights
Su materialiu atlygiu sietinos teorinės prielaidosSu ekonominiais aspektais ir bandymais objektyviai nustatyti darbo užmokestį dažniausiai siejama ribinio darbo našumo teorija
The analysis bases on the reward dimension of the Public Service Bargains (PSBs) model which reflects different approaches to tangible and intangible reward elements. This theoretical approach is used to test the hypotheses that there is a clear public sector bargain on the executive’s rewards system, and this bargain was shaped by pre-planned reforms in the public sector
The analysis of the legal framework of the tangible reward system explains how egalitarian bargain was consolidated in the fragmented public service system, and pre-planned reforms added some hierarchical and individualistic elements to this system
Summary
Su ekonominiais aspektais ir bandymais objektyviai nustatyti darbo užmokestį dažniausiai siejama ribinio darbo našumo teorija Balsam S., An Introduction to Executive Compensation, London: Academic Press, 2002, p. Tokiu atveju organizacijų vadovų atlygis gali būti interpretuojamas kaip „atlygis už sėkmę“35. Vų atlyginimą galima vertinti kaip socialinį konstruktą, kur socialinis statusas ir atitinkama pozicija yra esminis faktorius, lemiantis atlygį, o darbo užmokesčio skirtumai gali būti suvokiami kaip konkretaus vadovo socialiai nulemtos specifinės pozicijos rezultatas[39]. Čia aptartų teorijų sinteze remiasi aukščiausio lygio vadovų atlygį padedantys nustatyti konsultantai, kurie stengiasi įvertinti tiek vadovo atsakomybės ribas, tiek jo atlygio palyginimą su rinka ir sąsają su. 39 Berrone P., Otten J., „A Global Perspective on Executive Compensation“, GomezMejia L. M., „Motivation and Politics in Executive Compensation“, Academy of Management Review 9 (2),1984, p. Kad priklausomai nuo konteksto, tiek politikai, tiek viešųjų organizacijų vadovai, siekdami pagrįsti darbo užmokesčio pokyčių poreikį, yra linkę selektyviai pasitelkti minėtų teorijų argumentaciją
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.