Search results

Asks whether performance‐related pay can be compatible with TQM and examines the opinions of leading “gurus” on the subject. Looks at examples of good practice in performance management in the United Kingdom and at the practical issues involved for an organization using TQM. Indicates how remuneration can be linked to several aspects of performance, both individual and in groups. Contends that if an organization is willing to invest money in a quality programme then it seems sensible to “link pay to the practices and process associated with organizational success”.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a short review of some of the sessions at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) Conference.

The paper reviews a number of sessions held at the CIPD Conference.

The paper finds that session tracks covered: “Strategy and leadership”, “Managing change, how HR can make the difference”, “Driving your organization's performance”, “Managing talent, today's issues”, “Tomorrow's workforce”, and a workshop track featuring some six “How to” sessions.

The paper provides a brief review of some of the sessions covered at the CIPD Conference.

Manuscripts should be forwarded to the editor, Vicky Arnold, at VArnold@bus.ucf.edu via e-mail. All text, tables, and figures should be incorporated into a word document prior to submission. The manuscript should also include a title page containing the name and address of all authors and a concise abstract. Also, include a separate word document with any experimental materials or survey instruments. If you are unable to submit electronically, please forward the manuscript along with the experimental materials to the following address:

References should follow the APA (American Psychological Association) standard. References should be indicated by giving (in parentheses) the author's name followed by the date of the journal or book; or with the date in parentheses, as in ‘suggested by Canada (2005).’

The extant literature has established that industry-specialist auditors gain performance-enhancing industry-specific sub-specialty knowledge (e.g., Solomon, Shields, & Whittington, 1999) via training and on the job experience. This knowledge has been shown to allow specialists to outperform non-specialists on a range of industry-specific tasks. The current study extends this line of research by comparing and contrasting the relative performance gains enjoyed by industry-specialist auditors in two different industry settings, one regulated and the other unregulated. When specializing in regulated industries, auditors gain very detailed industry-specific knowledge which is not the case for specialists in unregulated industries (Dunn & Mayhew, 2004). By comparing industry-specialists to non-specialists with matching industry-based experience, this study measures the relative benefits of specialization in different industry settings, rather than the benefits of specialization per se, which has been well established in the literature. This study finds that the performance gains made by regulated industry-specialists significantly outweigh those made by unregulated industry-specialists on industry-specific tasks. The implications of these results for future research and practice are explored in the body of the chapter.