The Construction of Diversified Incentive Paths for Employees Adapted to the Characteristics of Startups

Chunyan Zhang

doi:10.54691/8t83rk76

Authors

Chunyan Zhang Hankou University, Wuhan, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/8t83rk76

Keywords:

Start-up; Employee Motivation; Diversified Motivation; Talent Management; Organisational Development.

Abstract

Against the background of the changing market competition environment, start-ups face many challenges such as talent attraction, employee stability and organisational capacity improvement. Because the enterprise is in the early stage of development, the resource reserve, management system and brand influence are relatively limited, and the traditional single incentive method of relying on salary improvement is difficult to fully meet the multi-level needs of employees in terms of income security, career development, value recognition, etc. Building a diversified incentive system for employees that meets the characteristics of start-ups is conducive to improving employee motivation, enhancing team cohesion, and promoting the sustainable growth of enterprises. This article analyses the incentive management of employees in start-ups, sorts out the current problems of enterprises in incentive input, mechanism adaptation and demand matching, and puts forward a scientific implementation path in combination with remuneration incentives, growth incentives, long-term interest incentives and other systems, in order to improve the level of talent management and construction of start-ups. The stable organisational system provides reference.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Baron, J. N., & Hannan, M. T. (2002). Organizational blueprints for success in high tech start ups: Lessons from the Stanford Project on Emerging Companies. California Management Review, 44(3), 8–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166130

[2] Cardon, M. S., & Stevens, C. E. (2004). Managing human resources in small organizations: What do we know? Human Resource Management Review, 14(3), 295–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.06.001

[3] Marler, J. H., & Boudreau, J. W. (2017). An evidence based review of HR analytics. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1244699

[4] Oyer, P., & Schaefer, S. (2005). Why do some firms give stock options to all employees?: An empirical examination of alternative theories. Journal of Financial Economics, 76(1), 99–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.03.004

[5] Rauch, A., & Hatak, I. (2016). A meta analysis of different HR enhancing practices and performance of small and medium sized firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(5), 485–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.05.005

[6] Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40 year meta analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 980–1008. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035661

[7] Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322

[8] Heneman, R. L., Tansky, J. W., & Camp, S. M. (2000). Human resource management practices in small and medium sized enterprises: Unanswered questions and future research perspectives. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(1), 11–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225870002500103

[9] Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033 2909.119.2.254

[10] Lazear, E. P. (2000). Performance pay and productivity. American Economic Review, 90(5), 1346–1361. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.5.1346