Sample Management Essay Paper on Performance and Productivity in Teams: Reward systems

Performance and Productivity in Teams: Reward systems

In the current work environment, fundamental transformation in terms of complex structures are taking place. Today, businesses face complex as well as dynamic challenges that are a consequence of increased globalization tendencies such as competitiveness of the world economy, which is open to any merchant. As explained by Boudreau and Ramstad, (2012), some of the biggest changes in the corporate world have taken place in the field of HR, as it has become a linchpin of organization productivity and effectiveness. As narrated by Taylor and Keeffe (2013), the emergence of new technologies such as the internet, coupled with the increasing need for control from business, has given rise to demand for a new look workforce. Subsequently, teamwork has become the new face of HR policies such as employee motivation, employee satisfaction, as well as HR outsourcing. HR policies currently, seek to adopt new to act quickly, operate more efficiently, as well as better organize themselves for the future, which clearly is a derivative of teamwork and its rewards.

From the Harvard Business Review article ‘Teamwork Works Best When Top Performers Are Rewarded’ by Bradley KirkmanNing LiXiaoming ZhengBrad and HarrisXin Liu there is a clear link between team productivity and reward. However, have been questions that have been previously asked regarding how best to reward a team for its work and maintaining their motivation. The article goes as far back as the 1990s to explain the effectiveness of teamwork and in the process discussed how to improve productivity; nevertheless, the current era is different from a decade ago.  

Team reward systems are considered as the newest as well as fastest growing remuneration strategies that have effectiveness when moving a company towards a team-based environment. There are various reasons for implementing the reward system primary being the introduction of team –based management. It is becoming increasingly harder to distinguish between group and personal contribution thus there is a need to explore tem based management options. There are a variety of issues to consider when selecting a team reward system such as the size of the reward. As indicated by Boudreau and Ramstad, (2012), the reward size has a direct connection with employee satisfaction and motivation, principles that are known to increase effectiveness as well as productivity. It should be noted however that a larger reward does not necessarily mean additional satisfaction. The reward has to be the right type in terms of the group’s interests. Therefore, the initial determination of the reward type, size, and frequency by management is also dependent on leadership as well as goals and objectives. As explained by Taylor and Keeffe (2013), the goals by group performance take several form such as quantity, speed, accuracy, and service to others thus making them far more effective than personal goals which are less and harder to achieve.    

In summary, the Harvard Business Review article on rewards clearly showed a new dynamics of HR and the working environment. The collective IQ of a team is greater than that of an individual’s thus making them more effective. Businesses have developed training and learning programs to improve staff productivity. The development of an effective team suggests the creation of a team reward system. In the article, it is clear that there are issues such as size of the team, size of the reward, leadership, goals, as well as motivational strategies that need to be taken into account before coming up with a team reward system.  


Boudreau, J. W., & Ramstad, P. M. (2012). Strategic HRM measurement in the 21st century: From justifying HR to strategic talent leadership.

Bradley K, Ning L, Xiaoming Z, Brad H, and Xin L. (2016). Teamwork Works Best When Top Performers Are Rewarded. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from

Taylor, H. R., & Keeffe, J. E. (2013). World blindness: a 21st century perspective. British journal of ophthalmology85(3), 261-266.