Understanding Executive Pay Equity and Fairness: Ratios and Rationality
Jim Bowers and Fred Whittlesey, CCP, CEP, Hay Group
There is an increasing level of governance and legislative activity proposing disclosure of pay ratios between the CEO and other employees. As there is no empirical basis for determining the appropriate ratio, companies must use caution in applying ratios for assessing or setting pay. This article explains why such factors as company size, organization structure, business model, extent of global operations and total compensation mix must be considered in the analysis. In addition, many of the perceived excesses leading to charges of “unfair” executive pay have to do with design and operation of pay programs, not the amount of pay itself, further highlighting the difficulties of the ratio-based approach.

Work-life Programs: Attracting, Retaining and Empowering the Federal Workforce
Kathleen Lingle, WLCP, Alliance for Work-Life Progress at WorldatWork
In this article, the author examines the current state of work-life effectiveness in the public and private sectors and recommends how work-life can be strengthened to improve federal government operations. The article is adapted from May 4, 2010, written testimony of the executive director of the Alliance for Work-Life Progress at Worldat- Work before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Subcommittee on the Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia.

A Longitudinal Lens on the Evolution of EAP, Work-life and Wellness Benefit Programs
Roland Zullo, Ph.D., Institute for Research on Labor, Employment and the Economy, University of Michigan; Patricia A. Herlihy, Ph.D., RN, Rocky Mountain Research; and Max Heirich, Ph.D., Institute for Research on Labor, Employment and the Economy, University of Michigan
The study inquired about how employee assistance (EAP), work-life and wellness programs had changed in businesses that had been recognized as family-friendly 15 years earlier. The researchers used semi-structured interviews of corporate benefits managers from 28 of those firms acknowledged as family-friendly in 1993 to determine how the programs had changed and the factors contributing to those changes. They identified six dimensions that influenced benefits reorganization: 1) factors supporting the resiliency of family-friendly benefits; 2) factors pressuring firms to choose between targeted and standardized benefits; 3) the globalization of business operations; 4) administrative requirements to provide a cost-benefit rationale for programs; and 5) factors influencing decisions to outsource services or provide benefits internally.

Was Our Initial Confidence in the Total Rewards Concept Justified?
Frank Giancola
In 2000, when WorldatWork introduced its version of total rewards concept, research demonstrating how effective nonfinancial rewards were for attracting, motivating and retaining employees was in short supply. Little was known about the relative importance of the total rewards elements for each of these objectives and how they interact to affect an employee’s behavior. During the past 10 years, this gap in knowledge has been narrowed by the intelligence gained from employee surveys and field studies of HR consulting firms and organizational psychologists. This paper examines the evidence to see if the early confidence in the total rewards concept was justified.

Internal Equity and External Competitiveness: Critical Components of Effective Rewards Strategies
By Robert J. Greene, Ph.D., CCP, CBP, GRP, GPHR, CPHRC, Reward Systems Inc.
Effective rewards strategies result in programs that are individually and in aggregate: 1) internally equitable; 2) externally competitive; 3) well administered; 4) affordable; 5) acceptable to employees; 6) a good fit to the organizational culture and the workforce culture(s); and 7) contributors to organizational success. If conflicts arise among these characteristics, a balance must be achieved that is optimal. Rarely can all seven of the ideal results be fully realized. This article focuses on achieving a balance between internal equity and external competitiveness.

Funding Public Sector “Other Post-Retirement Employee Benefits” (OPEBs)
By John G. Kilgour, Ph.D., California State University, East Bay
The Government Accounting Standards Board’s 2004 adoption of rules for public-sector employee pensions required for the first time that state and local governments quantify and disclose the magnitude of their unfunded post-retirement employee benefits (OPEB). At that time, some jurisdictions were in good shape while others had large and serious problems. The new standards became fully effective in late 2008, coincident with the beginning of the 2008–09 recession, which has had a devastating impact on state and local government revenues. This article examines this development and the various alternatives available to public-sector employers in grappling with this new and huge problem. The choices are to shed costs, transfer them to the employees and retirees, and/or to prefund their OPEB liabilities. Prefunding makes sense in the long run; however, the elected officials who are ultimately responsible for the decision and its implementation tend to operate in the short run.

Published Research in Total Rewards