Abstract
Abstract We used a policy-capturing approach to study 3,104 pay allocation decisions of 97 managers (54 men, 43 women) working for a large nonprofit organization with a pay-for-performance policy. Subordinates' performance, the consistency in subordinates' past job performance, the importance of the subordinates' jobs in meeting managerial goals, and the degree of disruption that would occur if subordinates quit significantly affected managerial pay allocations. A major proportion of the variance across the managers was accounted for by sampling error and criterion unreliability. The subjects' explicit rankings of the four subordinate-related factors did not correspond highly with the rankings of their regression weights.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: 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.
