Organizational Behavior and Management 10Th Edition Ivancevich Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Organizational Behavior and
Management 10th Edition Ivancevich

Solutions Manual
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankdeal.com/dow
nload/organizational-behavior-and-management-10th-edition-ivancevich-solutions-ma
nual/
Chapter 07 - Evaluation and Rewards Influence Behavior
Chapter Seven: Evaluation and Rewards Influence Behavior
Chapter Synopsis
This chapter addresses the use of rewards and their distribution in organizations by focusing on
performance evaluation, reinforcement theory, and rewards.
It begins with an overview of the purposes of evaluation, the impact of evaluations on performance,
and methods for improving evaluations. Next is a discussion of performance evaluation feedback,
including its purposes and the 360-degree approach. Reinforcement theory follows, touching on
positive reinforcers, punishment, extinction, and reinforcement schedules.
The chapter goes on to discuss individual rewards, defines intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, and
provides examples of each. Rewards must be administered, so the three major theoretical approaches
are presented: (1) positive reinforcement, (2) modeling and social imitation, and (3) expectancy.
The following sections examine how rewards affect organizational concerns, such as turnover,
performance, and commitment, and innovative reward systems (skill-based, broadbanding, concierge
services, team-based rewards, part-time benefits, Gainsharing, and Employee Stock Ownership Plans
(ESOP).
The chapter concludes with a discussion of Line of sight, which means that the employee perceives
that there is a “real” linkage between his or her performance and the rewards received.
Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students should be able to:

1. Describe the purposes of performance evaluation.
2. Explain how feedback is used to evaluate performance.
3. Summarize the basic principles of reinforcement theory.
4. Differentiate between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.
5. Discuss how rewards affect important organizational outcomes.
6. Compare several innovative reward systems.
7-1
© 2014 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or distribution in any
manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.
Key Terms
job performance—A set of employee work-related behaviors designed to accomplish

organizational goals.
operant—Behaviors amenable to control by altering the consequences (rewards and punishments)
that follow them.
punishment—Presenting an uncomfortable consequence for a particular behavior response or
removing a desirable reinforcer because of a particular behavior response. Managers can punish by
application or punish by removal.
extinction—The decline in the response rate because of nonreinforcement.
continuous reinforcement—A schedule that is designed to reinforce behavior every time the
behavior exhibited is correct.
modeling—A method of administering rewards in which employees learn the behaviors that are
desirable by observing how others are rewarded. It is assumed that behaviors will be imitated if the
observer views a distinct link between performance and rewards.
valence—The strength of a person’s preference for a particular outcome.
commitment—A sense of identification, involvement, and loyalty expressed by an employee toward
the company.
broadbanding—A pay system that reduces the actual number of pay grades to a relatively few
broadly based pay grades. Places an emphasis on titles, grades, and job descriptions.
7-2
Lecture Outline
Slide Notes
Review chapter objectives.
These objectives are revisited on the last slide for the

chapter.
Organizations use a variety of rewards to attract and retain

people and to motivate them to achieve their personal and
organizational goals. Managers must address almost daily
how and when to distribute rewards, such as pay, transfers,
promotions, praise, and recognition. Rewards also can help
create a climate that results in more challenging and
satisfying jobs. In this chapter we are concerned with how
rewards are determined and distributed by managers. We
discuss the reactions of people to rewards and examine the
response of employees to rewards received in organizational
settings. Additionally, we present the role of rewards in
organizational absenteeism, turnover, commitment, and job
performance.
7-3
To distribute these rewards equitably, it is necessary to

evaluate employee performance. Thus, we begin this chapter
with a look at performance evaluation. Developing effective
evaluation systems is just as critical to organizational success
as developing effective reward systems. Both systems
represent efforts to influence employee behavior. To achieve
maximum effectiveness, it is necessary to carefully link
employee evaluation systems with reward systems. To
distribute these rewards equitably, it is necessary to evaluate
employee performance.
Before individuals can be rewarded, there must be some

basis for distributing rewards. Some rewards may accrue to
all individuals simply by virtue of their employment with the
organization. These are what are known as universal or
across-the-board rewards. Other rewards may be a function
of tenure or seniority. Many rewards, how-ever, are related
to job performance
We begin this chapter with a look at performance evaluation.

Developing effective evaluation systems is just as critical to
organizational success as developing effective reward
systems. Both systems represent efforts to influence
employee behavior. To achieve maximum effectiveness, it is
necessary to carefully link employee evaluation systems with
reward systems.
7-4
The basic purpose of evaluation, of course, is to provide

information about work performance. More specifically,
however, such information can serve a variety of purposes.
Some of the major ones are: 1. Provide a basis for reward
allocation, including raises, promotions, transfers, layoffs,
and so on. 2. Identify high-potential employees. 3. Validate
the effectiveness of employee selection procedures. 4.
Evaluate previous training programs. 5. Stimulate
performance improvement. 6. Develop ways of overcoming
obstacles and performance barriers 7. Identify training and
development opportunities. 8. Establish supervisor–
employee agreement on performance expectations. These
eight specific purposes can be grouped into two broad
categories. The first four have a judgmental orientation; the
last four have a developmental orientation. Evaluations with
a judgmental orientation focus on past performance and
provide a basis for making judgments regarding which
employee should be rewarded and how effective
organizational programs—such as selection and training—
have been. Evaluations with a developmental orientation are
more concerned with improving future performance by
ensuring expectations are clear and by identifying ways to
facilitate employee performance through training. These two
broad categories are not mutually exclusive. Performance
evaluation systems can, and do, serve both general purposes.
The general purpose for which performance evaluations are
conducted will vary across different cultures, as will the
frequency with which evaluations are conducted, who con-
ducts them, and a variety of other components
7-5
Effective performance evaluation is a continuous, ongoing

process and, simply stated, involves asking two questions:
“Is the work being done effectively?” and “Are employee
skills and abilities being fully utilized?” The first question
tends toward a judgmental orientation, while the second is
more developmental in nature. Generally, evaluations should
focus on translating the position responsibilities into each
employee’s day-to-day activities.
When evaluating employee behavior, it is necessary to
ensure not only that the focus of the appraisal remains on job
performance, but that it also has proper weighting of relevant
behaviors. Relevancy, in the context of performance
evaluation, has three aspects: deficiency, contamination, and
distortion. Deficiency occurs when the evaluation does not
focus on all aspects of the job. If certain job responsibilities
and activities are not considered, the evaluation is deficient.
Contamination can be said to be the reverse of deficiency. It
occurs when activities not part of the job are included in the
evaluation.
7-6
It has been suggested that performance evaluation is the most

important employee-related function in an organization.
A full treatment of performance evaluation problems and

methods of overcoming them is beyond the scope of our
discussion here. We offer, however, the following
suggestions for improving the effectiveness of virtually any
evaluation system. 1. Higher levels of employee participation
in the evaluation process lead to more satisfaction with the
system. 2. Setting specific performance goals to be met
results in greater performance improvement than discussions
of more general goals. 3. Evaluating subordinates’
performance is an important part of a supervisor’s job;
managers should receive training in the process, and they
should be evaluated on how effectively they discharge this
part of their own job responsibilities. 4. Systematic
evaluation of performance does little good if the results are
not communicated to employees. 5. Performance evaluation
feedback should not focus solely on problem areas; good
performance should be actively recognized and reinforced.6.
Remember that while formal performance evaluation may
take place on a set schedule, effective evaluation is a
continuous, ongoing process.
To the extent that performance is linked with the

organization’s reward system, performance evaluation
represents an attempt to influence the behavior of
organizational members. That is, it is an attempt to reinforce
the continuation or elimination of certain actions. The basic
assumption is that behavior is influenced by its consequences
and that it is possible to affect behavior by controlling such
consequences.
7-7
Upon the completion of a performance evaluation, the

manager (evaluator) usually is expected to provide feedback.
The feedback session provides information concerning the
rationale for the evaluation to the individual. If possible,
objective information is used to guide the evaluated
employee to improve or sustain performance. The need for
feedback among people on and off the job is significant.
People want to know how they are doing, how they are being
perceived by others, and how they can make adjustments to
perform better. Simply telling someone “you are doing OK,”
“keep up the good work,” or “you’re too emotional” is too
vague and subjective to be useful to bring about
improvement One of the most dreaded experiences of
managers is delivering feedback to a poorly performing
employee. Telling a person that you have evaluated his
performance as inadequate, poor, or below expectations is
difficult. Giving a person bad news is just not a comfortable,
enjoyable experience.
Performance evaluation feedback can be instructional and/or
motivational to the receiver (the evaluated person). Feedback
instructs when it points out areas for improvement and
teaches new behavior.
Performance evaluation feedback is motivational when it

provides a reward or promises a reward. A supervisor
informing a technician that her report is superb and will
serve as an example of an outstanding model is a form of
reward via recognition. Receiving a compliment or sign of
excellent work from a valued colleague (e.g., supervisor,
peer, or subordinate) can be very motivational and
energizing.
Exhibit 7.1 presents a sample of feedback sources, individual

characteristics, and cognitive evaluation factors that have an
impact on the eventual behavioral outcomes. People who
possess high self-efficacy are candidates for wanting
feedback. They want to verify and validate their competency
or self-efficacy. As Exhibit 7.1 points out, feedback can
result in greater effort, a desire to make corrective
adjustments, and persistence. These can be very positive
behaviors that ultimately result in better or improved
performance. Another possible consequence of feedback is
disregarding it or simply not accepting it as valid.
7-8
An increasing number of firms are using multisource

feedback, instead of only a top-down feedback program. A
recent survey suggests that 90 percent of Fortune 1000 firms
use some form of multisource program. The increasing use
of multi-source programs is the result of calls for more
fairness, clarity, and credibility in performance improvement
programs. In a 360-degree program, evaluators could include
creditors, peers or team members, supervisors, subordinates,
and the person. Anyone in the person’s full domain (his or
her circle or 360-degree range) could serve as an evaluator.
As organizations attempt to improve the impact of their 360-
degree feedback pro-grams, several best practices are being
used: 1. Use 360-degree feedback primarily for individual
development. This will help increase the acceptance of the
program by employees. 2. Integrate 360-degree feedback
with other activities. Assessment results can be followed by
additional coaching and training, goal setting, and
organizational development initiatives. 3. Link the feedback
process with the overall strategy and direction of the firm.
For example, build in customers if the firm’s strategy is to
become more customer-focused. 4. Exert administrative
control over every aspect of the 360-degree process. This
includes helping to choose raters and training everyone
involved in the process. 5. Make senior management role
models. When employees see senior managers receiving and
acting on 360-degree feedback, they are more likely to take
the initiative seriously. 6. Use highly trained internal coaches
to leverage the investment. Coaches can help employees
interpret results and create action plans for improvement. 7.
Evaluate the effectiveness or return on investment of the
process.
7-9
Arguments in Favor of 360-Degree Feedback
Research evidence is still insufficient to support the use of a

multisource, 360-degree performance feedback program. The
constant concern about fairness and credibility in evaluation
is the major argument in favor of 360-degree programs.
Multiple raters have different viewpoints of a person’s
performance. A supervisor has a single-person’s perspective
or overview. It is considered more thorough and credible to
have multiple views being expressed. There appears to be
support among evaluated persons for a 360-degree program.
Employee acceptance is important in using any management-
initiated program.
Arguments against 360-Degree Feedback
When information is being used to pinpoint performance,

feedback providers may be reluctant to provide true ratings
for fear that negative comments might be used against the
person’s career progress or salary progression. If feedback
sources are concerned about the use of their ratings, they
may inflate such ratings. Another argument against 360-
degree programs involves the frequency of observation of
performance. How often does a supplier or even a peer view,
firsthand, the performance of a person? Differences in
observation frequency across evaluators result in varying
responses based not on actual or regular performance, but on
what was observed on a limited number of occasions.
In sum, the 360-degree feedback process, when developed,

administered, and man-aged in a proper manner, offers
promise to managers who are interested and brave enough to
receive information on how they are doing. However,
additional research is necessary to fine-tune 360-degree
feedback programs and to determine whether they can make
a major impact on employees’ job performance
7-10
Learning experts believe that reinforcement is the most

important principle of learning. Desirable or reinforcing
consequences (e.g., recognition in the feedback program of
doing an excellent job) will increase the strength of a
behavior and increase its probability of being repeated.
Undesirable or punishment consequences will decrease the
strength of a response and decrease its probability of being
repeated. Attempts to influence behavior through the use of
rewards and punishments that are consequences of the
behavior are called operant conditioning. Operants are
behaviors that can be controlled by altering the consequences
that follow them.
Reinforcement is an extremely important principle of

conditioning. Managers often use positive reinforcers to
influence behavior. A positive reinforcer is a stimulus that,
when added to the situation, strengthens the probability of a
behavioral response. Thus, if the positive reinforcer has
value (is desirable) to the person, it can be used to improve
performance. Negative reinforcement refers to an increase in
the frequency of a response following removal of the
negative reinforcer immediately after the response.
Reinforcement is different from a reward in that a reward is
perceived to be desirable and is provided to a person after
performance. All rewards are not reinforcers. Recall that
reinforcers are defined as increasing the rate of behavior.
Punishment is defined as presenting an uncomfortable or
unwanted consequence for a particular behavioral response.
It is an increasingly used managerial strategy. Some work-
related factors that can be considered punishments include a
superior’s criticism or being demoted. While punishment can
suppress behavior if used effectively, it is a controversial
method of behavior modification in organizations. It should
be employed only after careful and objective consideration
of all the relevant aspects of the situation.
Extinction means reducing unwanted behavior. When

positive reinforcement for a learned response is withheld,
individuals will continue to practice that behavior for some
period of time. However, after a while, if the
nonreinforcement continues, the behavior will decrease in
frequency and intensity and will eventually disappear. The
decline and eventual cessation of the response rate is known
as extinction.
7-11
It is extremely important to properly time the rewards or

punishments used in an organization. The timing of these
outcomes is called reinforcement scheduling. In the simplest
schedule, the response is reinforced each time it occurs. This
is called continuous reinforcement .If reinforcement occurs
only after some instances of a response and not after each
response, an intermittent reinforcement schedule is being
used. From a practical viewpoint, it is virtually impossible to
rein-force continually every desirable behavior.
Consequently, in organizational settings, almost all
reinforcement is intermittent in nature. An intermittent
schedule means that reinforcement does not occur after every
acceptable behavior. The assumption is that learning is more
permanent when correct behavior is rewarded only part of
the time. Ferster and Skinner have presented four types of
intermittent reinforcement schedules. Briefly, the four are:
1. Fixed interval. A reinforcer is applied only when the

desired behavior occurs after the passage of a certain period
of time since the last reinforcer was applied. An example
would be to praise positive performance only once a week
and not at other times. The fixed interval is one week. 2.
Variable interval. A reinforcer is applied at some variable
interval of time. A promotion is an example. 3. Fixed ratio.
A reinforcer is applied only if a fixed number of desired
responses have occurred. An example would be paying a
salesperson for an e-learning firm for each dollar of revenue
above $6,000 for which she receives a 12 per-cent
commission. 4. Variable ratio. A reinforcer is applied only
after a number of desired responses, with the number of
desired responses changing from situation to situation,
around an average. Research on reinforcement schedules has
shown that higher rates of response usually are achieved with
ratio rather than interval schedules.
The main objectives of reward programs are: (1) to attract

qualified people to join the organization, (2) to keep
employees coming to work, and (3) to motivate employees to
achieve high levels of performance.
7-12
Performance results from a combination of the effort of an

individual and the individual’s level of ability, skill, and
experience. The performance results of the individual are
evaluated either formally or informally by management, and
two types of rewards can be distributed: intrinsic or extrinsic.
Exhibit 7.3 presents a model that attempts to integrate

satisfaction, motivation, performance, and rewards. Reading
the exhibit from left to right suggests that the motivation to
exert effort is not enough to cause acceptable performance.
The rewards are evaluated by the individual, and to the
extent the rewards are satisfactory and equitable, the
individual achieves a level of satisfaction.
A significant amount of research has been done on what

determines whether individuals will be satisfied with
rewards. Lawler has summarized five conclusions based on
the behavioral science research literature. They are: 1.
Satisfaction with a reward is a function both of how much is
received and of how much the individual feels should be
received. This conclusion is based on the comparisons that
people make. When individuals receive less than they feel
they should, they are dissatisfied. 2. An individual’s feelings
of satisfaction are influenced by comparisons with what hap-
pens to others. 3. Satisfaction is influenced by how satisfied
employees are with both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. 4.
People differ in the rewards they desire and in how important
different rewards are to them. Individuals differ on what
rewards they prefer. 5. Some extrinsic rewards are satisfying
because they lead to other rewards
7-13
. The relationship between rewards and satisfaction is not

perfectly understood, nor is it static. It changes because
people and the environment change. However, any reward
package should (1) be sufficient to satisfy basic needs (e.g.,
food, shelter, clothing), (2) be considered equitable, and (3)
be individually oriented.
The rewards shown in Exhibit 7.3 are classified into two

broad categories: extrinsic and intrinsic. Whether rewards
are extrinsic or intrinsic, it is important to first consider the
rewards valued by the person since an individual will put
forth little effort unless the reward has value. An intrinsic
reward is defined as one that is self-administered by the
person. It provides a sense of satisfaction or gratification
and, often, a feeling of pride for a job well done. An extrinsic
reward is initiated from outside the person. Receiving praise
from a supervisor is extrinsic or initiated by someone other
than the person. Both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards can
have value.
7-14
Extrinsic Rewards
Financial Rewards: Salary and Wages Money is a major

extrinsic reward. It has been said, “Although it is generally
agreed that money is the major mechanism for rewarding and
modifying behavior in industry . . . very little is known about
how it works.” To really understand how money modifies
behavior, the perceptions and preferences of the person being
rewarded must be understood, a challenging task for a
manager.
Intrinsic Rewards
Completion The ability to start and finish a project or job is

important to some individuals. These people value what is
called task completion. Some people have a need to
complete tasks, and the effect that completing a task has on a
person is a form of self-reward.
Achievement is a self-administered reward that is derived

when a person reaches a challenging goal. McClelland has
found that there are individual differences in striving for
achievement. Some individuals seek challenging goals, while
others tend to seek moderate or low goals.
Autonomy Some people want jobs that provide them with

the right and privilege to make decisions and operate without
being closely supervised.
Personal Growth The personal growth of any individual is a

unique experience. An individual who is experiencing such
growth senses his or her development and can see how his or
her capabilities are being expanded. By expanding
capabilities, a person can maximize or at least satisfy skill
potential. Some people often become dissatisfied with their
jobs and organizations if they are not allowed or encouraged
to develop their skills.
7-15
The general assumption has been that intrinsic and extrinsic

rewards have an independent and additive influence on
motivation. That is, motivation is determined by the sum of
the person’s intrinsic and extrinsic sources of motivation.
This straightforward assumption has been questioned by
several researchers. Some have suggested that in situations in
which individuals are experiencing a high level of intrinsic
rewards, the addition of extrinsic rewards for good
performance may cause a decrease in motivation.
Basically, the person receiving self-administered feelings of

satisfaction is performing because of intrinsic rewards. Once
extrinsic rewards are added, feelings of satisfaction change
because performance is now thought to be due to the
extrinsic rewards. The addition of the extrinsic rewards tends
to reduce the extent to which the individual experiences self-
administered intrinsic rewards.
Managers are faced with the decision of how to administer

rewards. Three major theoretical approaches to reward
administration are: (1) positive reinforcement, (2) modeling
and social imitation, and (3) expectancy.
Positive Reinforcement
In administering a positive reinforcement program, the
emphasis is on the desired behavior that leads to job
performance rather than performance alone. The basic
foundation of administering rewards through positive
reinforcement is the relation-ship between behavior and its
consequences.
Modeling and Social Imitation
Many human skills and behaviors are acquired by
observational learning or, simply, imitation. Observational
learning equips a person to duplicate a response, but whether
the response actually is imitated depends on whether the
model person was rewarded or punished for particular
behaviors.
Expectancy Theory
Some research suggests that expectancy theory constructs
provide an important basis for classifying rewards. From a
rewards administration perspective, the expectancy
approach, like the other two methods of administering
rewards, requires managerial action.
7-16
Rewards affect employee perceptions, attitudes, and

behavior in a variety of ways. In turn, organizational
efficiency and effectiveness are affected. Three important
organizational concerns influenced by rewards are turnover
and absenteeism, performance, and commitment.
There is little research on the relationship between rewards

and organizational commitment. Commitment to an
organization involves three attitudes: (1) a sense of
identification with the organization’s goals, (2) a feeling of
involvement in organizational duties, and (3) a feeling of
loyalty to the organization. Research evidence indicates that
the absence of commitment can reduce organizational
effectiveness.
The typical list of rewards that managers can and do
distribute in organizations has been discussed. We all know
that pay, fringe benefits, and opportunities to achieve
challenging goals are considered rewards by most people. It
is also generally accepted that rewards are administered by
managers through such processes as reinforcement,
modeling, and expectancies. Managers are experimenting
with newer and innovative, yet largely untested, reward
programs. Seven different approaches to rewards that are not
widely tested are skill-based pay, broadbanding, concierge
services, team-based rewards, part-time benefits, gain-
sharing, and employee stock ownership plans.
An element of financial reward that organizations are having
problems with is the system of grading. Most systems have a
large number of grades. The multiple grade approach is often
out of alignment with the flatter, more team-oriented
organizational designs institutions are moving toward. To
counter this poor alignment, some firms are adopting what is
called a banding or broadbanding approach. Broadbanding
involves reducing numerous pay grades to a relatively few
broadband grades. An example of broadbanding would be
placing all managers into one band; all technicians into a
second band; all clerical personnel into a third band; and all
part-time employees into a fourth and. Broadbanding
emphasizes titles, grades, and job descriptions as presented
in Exhibit 7.4 . Rather than concentrating on moving up a
series of pay grades in a vertical system, employees could
spend most, if not all, of their careers in a single band and
move laterally as they acquire new skills or improve their
performance. This type of pay system allows a person who
needs to develop new skills to be placed in a lower band, but
continue to be paid more.
7-17
Promotions, increased pay, recognition for a job well done,

or the opportunity to own a part of an organization can be
motivators if there is a clear line of sight between what the
employee is doing and the reward. Line of sight means that
the employee perceives that there is a “real” linkage between
his or her performance and the rewards received. In the case
of extrinsic rewards, organizations need to have systems that
clearly tie rewards to desired performance. Gain-sharing,
stock options, and other extrinsic systems must be built
around the line-of-sight concept. Unfortunately,
accomplishing a clear line of sight is difficult. Merit-pay
systems claim that they reward performance. Despite the
notion of merit, employees do not always see or perceive the
connection between rewards and performance. The practice
of pay secrecy suggests that line of sight is difficult to
achieve. Secret pay actions cloud any line-of-sight effort.
This slide supports Exercise 7.1
7-18
This slide supports Exercise 7.2
7-19
Summary of Key Points

❑ Performance evaluation serves several major purposes, including (1) providing a basis for
reward allocation, (2) identifying high-potential employees, (3) validating the effectiveness
of employee selection procedures, (4) evaluating previous training programs, and (5)
facilitating future performance improvement.
❑ Feedback sessions should use objective information to help guide the evaluated employee to
improve or sustain performance.
❑ A 360-degree feedback program involves the use of multiple sources of evaluation
information collected from a full circle of evaluators (e.g., supervisors, subordinates, peers,
and others). •Reinforcement theory suggests that behavior is influenced by its consequences
and that it is possible to affect behavior by controlling such consequences. Desired behaviors
are reinforced through the use of rewards, while undesired behaviors can be extinguished
through punishment. The timing of rewards and punishments is extremely critical and is
controlled through the use of various reinforcement schedules.
❑ A useful model of individual rewards would include the suggestion that ability, skill, and
experience, in addition to motivation, result in various levels of individual performance. The
resulting performance is then evaluated by management, which can distribute two types of
rewards: intrinsic and extrinsic. These rewards are evaluated by the individual receiving them
and, to the extent that they result in satisfaction, motivation to perform is enhanced.
Organizational rewards can be classified as either extrinsic or intrinsic. Extrinsic rewards
include salary and wages, fringe benefits, promotions, and certain types of interpersonal
rewards. Intrinsic rewards can include such things as a sense of completion, achievement,
autonomy, and personal growth.
❑ An effective reward system would encourage the best performers to remain with the
organization, while causing the poorer performers to leave. To accomplish this, the system
must be perceived as equitable. Additionally, the reward system should minimize the
incidence of absenteeism. Generally, absenteeism will be less if an employee feels that
attendance will lead to more valued rewards and fewer negative consequences
❑ Both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards can be used to motivate job performance. For this to
occur, certain conditions must exist: The rewards must be valued by the employee, and they
must be related to the level of job performance that is to be motivated.
❑ In addition to standard organizational rewards such as pay, fringe benefits, advancement,
and opportunities for growth, some organizations are experimenting with more innovative
reward programs. Examples of such approaches include skill-based pay, broadbanding,
concierge services, team-based rewards, part-time benefits, gain-sharing, and employee stock
ownership plans
.
7-20
Review and Discussion Questions
1. Evaluations can be either judgmental or developmental in nature. Give examples of when

one a manager should use each type.
Ans: Evaluations with a judgmental orientation focus on past performance and provide a basis for
making judgments regarding which employee should be rewarded and how effective organizational
programs—such as selection and training—have been. Evaluations with a developmental orientation
are more concerned with improving future performance by ensuring expectations are clear and by
identifying ways to facilitate employee performance through training. These two broad categories
are not mutually exclusive. Performance evaluation systems can, and do, serve both general
purposes. Examples will vary.
2. Who should be included in a person’s 360-degree domain when evaluating his/her

performance?
Ans: To increase fairness, clarity, and credibility, multiple-source evaluations are very useful.
Included in this process could be: creditors, team members, peers, supervisors, subordinates, and the
individual being evaluated. Essentially, the process should ensure that information flows to the
individual being evaluated from above, below, and laterally.
3. What intrinsic rewards are important to you personally on a job and as a student?
Ans: Student answers will vary. Intrinsic rewards include feelings of accomplishment and
achievement, autonomy, and personal growth.
4. From a managerial perspective, why is it impractical to provide continuous reinforcement

in work environments? If it were practical, would it be a good idea? Explain.
Ans: It is impractical to provide continuous reinforcement because an effective program would
require exceptionally close monitoring of employee behavior and place heavy demands on the
administration of rewards, possibly involving hundreds, if not thousands of reinforcements each
week. Even if practical, the program may not be desirable because under this method reinforced
behavior quickly diminishes once the reinforcements are removed. It is also possible those
individuals could become overly dependent on the reinforcement, or that the impact of the
reinforcement on behavior could diminish over time.
5. The degree of employee satisfaction with the organization's reward system will significantly
affect how successful the system is in influencing performance. Based on the research
literature, what do we know about what influences whether individuals will be satisfied with
the rewards they receive?
Ans: Lawler's summary of research on individuals' satisfaction with rewards reaches the following
conclusions:
1. Satisfaction with a reward is a function both of how much is received and of how much the
individual feels should be received.
7-21
2. An individual's feelings of satisfaction are influenced by comparisons with what happens to

others.
3. Satisfaction is influenced by how satisfied employees are with both intrinsic and extrinsic
rewards.
4. People differ in the rewards they desire and in how important different rewards are to them.
5. Some extrinsic rewards are satisfying because they lead to other rewards.
6. What are the most important extrinsic rewards you receive from a job you currently hold
(or held in the past)?
Ans: Student solutions for this problem will vary however are likely to focus on pay.
7. The basic purpose of an evaluation is to provide information about work performance, but
the information can also be used for other purposes. Name five other uses for an employee
evaluation.
Ans: Any five of the following: (1) Can provide a basis for reward allocation, such as raises,
promotions, transfers, and layoffs. (2) Can identify high-potential employees. (3) Can validate the
effectiveness of employee selection procedures. (4) Can stimulate performance improvement. (5)
Can help identify training and development opportunities. (6) Can help establish superior-employee
agreement on performance expectations.
8. Why are team-based reward systems becoming more widely used?

Ans: Team-based reward systems are becoming more widely used because more companies are
being designed around, or are using, teams. Individual pay-for-performance reward systems don’t
properly fit in these organizations. Rewarding individual performance increases competition
amongst team members (disharmony), and there is a tendency to place individual goals above team
goals.
9. This chapter discusses a number of innovative reward systems. Can you suggest other
innovative approaches organizations might use? Identify potential problems with the
approaches you suggest and try to find ways of overcoming them.
Ans: Examples of innovative reward systems cited in the chapter include skill-based pay,
broadbanding, concierge services, team-based rewards, part-time benefits, gainsharing, and
employee stock ownership plans. Management experts have developed some other innovative
reward systems, such as the lump sum salary increase and the increasing pay check. Students may
have their own ideas, such as receiving extra paid days off, being allowed to dress casually, earning
bonus points that can be traded for merchandise and trips, and so on.
10. The gap between women’s and men’s pay is still considerable. What steps should
employers and managers take in order to close this gap in a fair and consistent manner?
Ans: If everything is equal (e.g. seniority, performance, experience), then paying women less than
men for performing the same job is not only unethical, it is illegal. To prevent such a situation from
7-22
happening, or reversing one that already exists, management in any organization should periodically
review all job responsibilities and the associated salaries and then determine if there are gender-
related inequities. At the same time, one should evaluate human resource records to ensure that
women are being hired and promoted in equitable numbers. (This response must be perfectly
accurate. There are some male hawks who really hammer a slanted and one-sided response. There
are also some women who pick this issue apart. A lot of in-class problems are set aside with a fair
and accurate response.)
Exercise 7.1: Diagnosing a Work Performance Problem

Purpose
This exercise demonstrates a systematic way for managers and subordinates to collaboratively
identify the cause(s) of dissatisfaction and performance problems. It leads students through a step-
by-step process and requires that they consider seven possible causes of performance problems
besides motivation: perception, resources, training, aptitude, expectations, incentives, and salience.
The Exercise in Class

This exercise can be effectively used as a take-home assignment. It requires 30-60 minutes to
complete, and more if the instructor assigns a paper summarizing the student's thinking at each
step of the process, as well as conclusions (an excellent assignment). It involves reading a short
case, then diagnosing the case using the diagnostic model provided. Diagnosis can also be done
through a small group discussion in the classroom, in which case, one person from each group
should be assigned the task of keeping records of the discussion and reporting out to the larger
class later. One of the more interesting questions to ask students is this: What did you think caused
the problem when you first read the case? Did you change your opinion as you worked through the
diagnostic model? Why?
Exercise 7.2: Making Choices about Rewards
Purpose
This exercise helps illustrate individual differences in reward preferences, emphasizes the
importance of both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, and enables students to explore the reasons
for the reward preferences of others.
The Exercise in Class

This activity is useful in assessing the relative value of specific intrinsic and extrinsic rewards
both with and among individuals. As an option in conducting the exercise, you have students
conduct the individual phase (I) and then form the students into groups and have each group
develop its group list of the eight most important rewards. Then examine intergroup
differences in open class discussion. In the discussion, several differences across groups should
be evident. It's useful to focus on those differences and have students discuss the factors
accounting for the differences.
7-23
Case 7.1: The Politics of Performance Appraisal
1. Based on your view of the objectives of performance evaluation, evaluate the perspectives
about performance appraisal presented by the managers.
A: The various comments made by the managers in this discussion of performance evaluations
indicates multiple and different understandings of the purpose of performance evaluations. For one,
ratings are used to reward past performance; for another, to motivate future performance. One thinks
the evaluations should be used to develop employees, another to protect the company, and so on.
These various purposes, each legitimate in its way, together suggest a performance evaluation
process that is seriously flawed (i.e., the corporation has not clarified its purposes), and managers
who have not been well trained in conducting them. Further, the multiple interpretations and
applications illustrate the power of perception: the managers get the same information, same
guidelines, same forms, but they interpret them to mean quite different things.
2. In your opinion, at what point does "fine-tuning" evaluations become unacceptable

distortion?
Students will disagree on this. One way you might personalize the issue of fine-tuning is to ask
students if they prefer a straight A-F grading system, or if they prefer that the instructor use pluses
and minuses. Why? Most will say that adding a plus or minus to a grade is fine-tuning, but jumping
or dropping a whole grade is distortion. You might ask students what it means to fundamentally
misrepresent an employee's performance, especially as it compares to the performance of others. Do
not expect unanimous agreement on this question. Do expect a robust discussion.
3. Assume you are the vice president of personnel at Eckel Industries and that you are aware
that fine-tuning evaluations is a prevalent practice among Eckel managers. If you disagree
with this perspective, what steps would you take to reduce the practice?
To reduce fine-tuning, the vice president needs to improve the entire evaluation process, starting
with clarifying the purpose of the evaluation. The process should move toward greater specification
of relevant job behaviors, and give managers freedom to reward outstanding behaviors as well as to
cite ineffective behaviors. The VP would also do well to ensure that every manager is trained in how
to use the company's performance appraisal instruments, how to conduct and interview, and how to
give feedback between appraisals. Employees, too, should be told what to expect in the process, so
that the manager is not left alone to explain or defend the system.
Teaching Hints and Tips
Lecture Ideas
1. Ask students to imagine that a philanthropist has given you $10,000 to distribute among the
students in your class. The only stipulation is that you must justify the amounts you give to
each student based on some sort of evaluation. Because you do not wish to be arbitrary or
7-24
autocratic, you have decided to ask the students for input as you create the evaluation tools and
processes. Their job is to give you ideas about the following items:
A. What performance factors should the evaluation consider? Why these?
B. How should the criteria selected in A above be measured? Weighted?
C. Who should be responsible for gathering data for the evaluation?
D. How should the evaluation be administered?
E. What guidance will these steps provide the instructor in deciding on the relative
distribution of the money?
F. Finally, poll the students to determine how many think the system will treat all fairly? If
someone does not see the system as fair, pursue the reasoning, and relate the idea to the
perceived fairness of evaluation and reward systems.
2. One way to spur student discussion concerning innovative approaches to rewards is to ask
students to think of other innovative ways to administer rewards that boost reward
effectiveness (employee satisfaction, motivation) without substantially boosting organizational
costs. Here are two approaches that have received attention in the rewards literature:
A. Lump sum salary increase: Often a raise in pay isn't that satisfying or rewarding
because when broken down into weekly paychecks, the raise loses its visibility (a $1000
raise doesn't look quite as glorious when administered as $15 a week). In the lump sum
salary increase program, workers who receive an annual pay raise can decide when they'll
receive their increase. For example, they might opt to be paid in one lump sum at the
beginning of the year, paying a low-rate interest charge on the unearned portion of the
sum received. This program increases the raise's visibility and enables employees to
shape the raise to fit their needs. It's also an effective recruiting tool. (What are the
disadvantages?)
B. The continuous raise: In this program, an employee's annual raise is distributed so that
each subsequent paycheck is a bit larger than the previous one. For example, an employee
who receives an annual 10 percent raise receives an increasing portion of the raise in
every subsequent paycheck so every paycheck is bigger; however, the total increase at the
end of the year equals 10 percent. This approach was pioneered in 1982 by Perfusion
Services Inc., a small company which reports that the program increases pay satisfaction
through the worker's psychological effect of doing a good job and making continual
financial progress.
3. While covering the section on extrinsic and intrinsic rewards pose the following question: "If a
subordinate does a good job and is highly praised by his or her supervisor, is this an example of an
extrinsic or intrinsic reward?" Most students are aware of the fact that extrinsic rewards are
administered externally, while intrinsic rewards come from performing the job and, as such, are self-
administered rewards. None-the-less, many students will incorrectly respond that the example
represents both an extrinsic and an intrinsic reward. This conclusion is incorrect, because the
example as stated demonstrates only an extrinsic reward. Why? Because we have no way of
knowing whether or not "doing a good job" is intrinsically rewarding for that individual. This point
should help to emphasize the very individualistic, self-defined nature of intrinsic rewards.
7-25
Project Ideas and Suggested Class Speakers

1. To further develop student understanding of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, have students
select a past job they've held and prepare a brief written rewards profile focusing on:
a. The intrinsic and extrinsic rewards provided from the job;
b. The satisfaction/motivational impact of those rewards; and
c. Changes in rewards they would make to boost their motivation to perform the job well.
This project is an effective homework assignment.
2. Many students find the concept of reinforcement fascinating, but think it does not apply to
them. To illustrate the effect of constant, immediate reinforcement set up this classroom
experience. Buy a large bag of penny candy (maybe several). Without announcing what you
plan to do, begin asking students questions. Each time a student answers a question, whether
correctly or not, give that student a piece of candy. Say nothing about what you are doing. Just
continue to distribute the candy as immediate reinforcement for participating in the classroom
discussion. The predictable outcome is that students volunteer wildly. At some point, change
the reinforcement schedule, giving the candy to every second student, or giving out one piece
of candy every minute. If the exercise goes on long enough, some students may even reach
satiation. Give students a chance to reflect on the exercise. How long did it take them to figure
out what you were doing? Did knowing what you were doing change their behavior? How did
they feel when you switched reinforcement schedules? (Try to get them to use the language of
reinforcement theory.) Then ask them to consider the impact of reinforcement theory applied in
a business setting. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the approach?
3. One way to further develop student understanding of reinforcement theory and behavior
modification is to have them, on a group basis, research and prepare a report on a OB Mod
program in an organization. Several organizations have conducted well-publicized programs,
such as Emery Air Freight.
7-26
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Stay off the
Moon!
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
Title: Stay off the Moon!
Author: Raymond F. Jones
Illustrator: Virgil Finlay
Release date: December 5, 2023 [eBook #72337]
Language: English
Original publication: New York, NY: Ziff-Davis Publishing Company,

1962
Credits: Greg Weeks, Mary Meehan and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK STAY OFF

THE MOON! ***
Stay off the MOON!
By RAYMOND F. JONES
Illustrated by FINLAY
How do you fill a pipette and measure out

a half c.c. of hydrochloric acid into a test
tube—from a quarter million miles away?
[Transcriber's Note: This etext was produced from

Amazing Stories December 1962.
Extensive research did not uncover any evidence that
the U.S. copyright on this publication was renewed.]
The real problem, of course, is not quite that simple. You don't literally
fill a pipette or use a test tube; you activate metering circuits that
force tiny, ground-glass plungers a measured distance into reagent
pumps. You send signals that close some valves and open others,
and apply heat and adjust temperatures, and filter solutions, and
send the product to a spectrometer that determines what you've got
and how much.
Then you have to code it and get the information from the moon to
earth.
James Cochran had seen the equipment work through hundreds of
checkout analyses. But he didn't understand it. He was a chemist,
and he had drawn up the specifications for the chemical analyzers of
the Prospector, but it had been the electronic boys who dreamed up
the remote mechanization and the telemetry equipment that would
allow him to sit before a complex panel at the Center and direct his
chemical laboratory on the moon to learn what the moon was made
of. Some of the light-headed technicians who worked on the project
had dubbed it Operation Green Cheese, but Cochran had more
respect for the complexity of the effort.
It was Sunday midnight. The beginning of countdown was forty hours
away. Cochran's crew had finished the chemical checkout, but in the
assembly hangar technicians still swarmed about the Prospector,
giving final-check to the power and telemetry components.
Jim Cochran signed off the last of the check reports and dropped
them in the slot for delivery to the Project Director. He turned off the
lights over his own desk and went out to the hangar. Under the blaze
of fluorescent lights the device looked like some monstrous insect.
The differential housings over the worm-screw drives gleamed like a
red, segmented carapace. The blue appendages of the solar cell
boxes were extended as if in some frantic appeal. The radar dish and
the helical antenna extended mutely upward. And, like a furious
proboscis, the exploratory drill, which would pierce the moon's skin to
a depth of five hundred feet, seemed to gnaw at the concrete floor of
the hangar.
Sam Jarvis, supervisor of electronic checkout, saw Jim Cochran enter
and came over to him with a broad, weary grin. "AOK, so far! This
package is going to be perfect. If only the rocket boys will set up a
bird that will take it to the moon—"
"They'd better," said Jim. "I don't think I could ever go through this
again if they dump the Prospector in the drink."
Sam turned back to look at the robot machine and the swarming
technicians. "Yes, you could," he said. "All of us have gone through
heartbreak time and again the past five years, watching them blow
up, or fall back and burn in the atmosphere because the motors didn't
ignite. Or seeing them get all the way to the moon and have some
five-dollar transistor conk out. But we always have at it again. You
will, too. You're new, but you're one of us now. You never back out
when you've come this far."
Watching the Prospector, Jim knew Sam was right. It had taken some
persuasion to bring him to this point, however. Until a couple of years
ago he had believed he would be content with ivory-tower plastics
research for the rest of his life. The persuasion had been applied
when Mary's brother, Allan Wright, had made the astronaut team.
Allan and Jim had grown up together. There was no other person Jim
felt closer to except Mary and their two children. Allan had dreamed
of space when they were kids, and when he was fifteen, he said, "I'm
going out there. I don't know how. But, somehow, I'm going out there."
Now, he had been selected to captain the first Apollo voyage. He had
been born for that purpose, he said.
But while he was still in the general pool of astronauts he had opened
his campaign to get Jim into the space program. "They need the best
brains they can get," Allan said. "You haven't got any right to sit in a
musty old plastics lab while guys with half your ability try to get us into
space. NASA will take you tomorrow!"
Jim didn't try to tell him that his plastics lab wasn't exactly musty, or
that he didn't think of himself as one of the best brains in the country.
But Mary sided with Allan; she was almost as excited about space as
he was. In the end, Jim went to NASA. Within days, he had been
assigned to head the development of the Prospector chemical
mechanization.
It had been something of a jolt to pull up all the roots he had so
carefully put down for him and his family, and move to the hectic,
bustling, space-frontier community of the Center. But he wasn't sorry.
It put something new in the blood, something men had never known
before.
Space!
The great Saturn lifted slowly, on a vast blossom of fire, with snowy
lox streaming down its sides. Then it was gone, a twinkle of fire high
above, among the stars. That was all.
Mary and Jim Cochran continued to stare at the fading twinkle, and
finally they turned away. Allan had obtained permission to be in the
blockhouse during the firing. It hadn't been necessary for Jim to be
there. He didn't want to know the instant-by-instant telemetry reports
which told whether or not the flight was successful. Sam or Allan
would call him when they knew. That would be soon enough for him.
"Let's drive down to the beach and watch the moon from there," said
Mary. "We can't just turn around and go home, like—like nothing had
happened."
Jim smiled in the darkness. Mary was as eager as he was for the
success of the flight. And she didn't have his fear of failure, that kept
him from wanting to know the maybe-yes, maybe-no indications that
the telemetry would first show.
"Sure," he said, "that's a good place to watch it."
The moon.
They watched its reflection thrashing on the water as the breakers

rolled across, under, and around it. It was the same image that men
had watched and wondered about and feared—for a half million
years. The first creatures that had any semblance of manhood had
sat on their haunches on this same shore and watched the same
moon and the same water.
And felt the same fears, Jim thought.
He didn't know whether it was fear or not, but there was some sense
of awesome mystery that filled him when he looked at the moon. It
had been that way all his life. He remembered how it was when he
was a boy and he walked through the fields at night on his way home.
He had to pass Cramer's Pond, and when the moon was up its light
from the sky and its reflection from the pond seemed to fill the whole
earth with a cold, silver light. He always hurried past the pond on
such nights.
Mary felt it, too. "I wonder why the moon makes people feel the way
they do."
"How does it make people feel?"
"Oh, kind of—kind of—you know!"
Jim laughed aloud. This was a typical Mary Cochran explanation. But
it told him all he needed to know. What she said was quite true. He
did know.
The baying of dogs on a wintery, moonlit night.
The madness called lunacy.
Seeds must be planted just so, in relation to the moon, or the crop will
fail.
Men had always felt strange things about the moon. Would a Saturn
missile and a mechanical monster in its nose be able to destroy all
that?
Jim started the car. "Let's get back. I've got to know how the flight's
going!"
They were still in the blockhouse, but the tension was relaxed. They
were talking and watching the meters and cathode ray tubes without
the strain and fear of failure. Jim knew the answer even before Sam
and Allan walked up to him and slapped him on the back.
"Where the devil did you go?" said Sam. "I thought you were going to
be right behind me when we fired, and you weren't here at all!"
"It's like your first baby, you want to be there, and you don't. Was it a
good shot?"
"Was it a good shot?" Allan's face became ecstatic. "We've never had
a better one. On course all the way!"
The Project Director, Emil Hennesey was behind them. His face was
bleak. "I expected you to be here for the firing, Cochran," he said. "It
seems to display little interest in your end of the project that you didn't
feel it necessary to show up."
Jim looked at him steadily and shrugged without answer. Hennesey
was one guy whose presence on the space team Jim couldn't figure
out. He was an ex-Major, and he had no capacity for dreaming. Men,
machines, transistors, rockets—they were all the same thing, merely
objects to be made to obey.
"You are aware of your next sequence of duties, I trust?" said
Hennesey.
Jim nodded curtly. "I'll be ready."
Sixty-six hours to the moon. That's what it takes with marginal escape
velocity and free-fall conditions. But it was really five hundred
thousand years and sixty-six hours, Jim thought. Surely there hadn't
been a single hour in all that time when someone, somewhere on
earth had not felt the longing to solve the secret mystery of the moon.
Now they were about to find the answer. But what would they have
when they found it? They would know that the surface dust of the
moon consisted of certain percentages of silicates and oxides. They
would know that the under layers were composed of rocks, maybe of
granite or limestone or basalt. They would determine how much of
each.
And then it would be over. The quest of the ages would be answered
with a few simple statements that could be obtained in any high-
school chemistry lab—if the lab were on the moon.
Jim Cochran felt there had to be more to it than that.
Why do dogs howl at the moon on winter nights?
Why do men say that madness of the mind is lunacy?
Why must planting be done in the right phase of the moon?
Little sleep was had by any of the crew during the next two nights,
even though the instrument stage of the ship was now completely
inert except for occasional telemetry signals that were fed to the
computers for course checking and correction. The ship was simply
falling on its own momentum.
Six hours before moonfall, activities in the tracking center accelerated
and the tension increased. There was no question of hitting the
moon; the landing had to be made safe for the cargo of instruments.
Jim Cochran watched the operators during this period. He told
himself he didn't understand it, but he had actually learned a great
deal of electronics during the past two years. He had had to in order
to design and operate a chemical laboratory 240,000 miles away.
The television screens came on, showing the pock-marked surface of
the moon as the ship orbited. The thrill and the fear of the great
unknown began to rise in Jim's throat. By the silence in the room, he
was sure the others sensed it, too.
Abruptly, the braking command was given and the ship began to fall
out of orbit towards the planned landing in the Sea of Rains. On the
screens, the images swelled as the ship plummeted faster. In one
corner could be seen the spring-loaded extension legs, like those of
some great spider. It seemed impossible that these could cushion the
violent shock of landing.
The sudden surge of a retro rocket and the blast of moondust blinded
the television eye, but there was a sense of crazy, rocking, rolling
motion. Then the eye went dead.
Jim almost cried out. The ship couldn't have crashed.
An operator quickly switched controls and the screens came alive

again. He turned a dial slowly. The camera eye moved. It swept the
craggy horizon and the nearby floor of the Sea of Rains. Others had
seen this before, but it was the first time for Jim. He found himself
pushing forward, drinking in the sight eagerly.
"The moon—the moon—" he said softly to himself. But the others
heard it and they understood.
Signals were sent across space to collapse the landing legs and
unfold the sides of the instrument cone like the leaves of a flower.
The Prospector lay exposed to the environment for which it was built.
Slowly, in response to other signals, the worm-screw drives, which
had been retracted against the body of the vehicle, turned through an
arc and lowered to the surface. Locked in position, the drive screws
began turning slowly. The vehicle moved off the now-useless landing
support and became an entity of its own.
The ungainly arms of the solar cells automatically oriented toward the
sun; the antennas pointed toward earth. The scanning cameras in the
turret of the Prospector took control of the video circuits and the turret
slowly turned as the vehicle moved across the face of the moon. The
landing support remained behind and slowly dwindled like some
useless wreckage.
There was sudden pandemonium in the tracking center control room.
The operators laid down their headsets and began pounding each
other on the back, while ear-splitting Indian yells filled the air. Jim and
Sam found themselves beating each other on the arms and yelling
senselessly.
"We made it!" Sam cried. "We made it! We got your little old
laboratory up there for you!"
There were hours of testing and calibration yet to be done before the
Prospector could be used for its primary mission. Hundreds of
electronic circuits had to be checked to see that they survived the
takeoff and landing without becoming distorted or inoperative.
Jim went home for the rest of the night. When he returned the next
morning Sam reported that all circuits were go, and the Prospector
was his.
He had operated the laboratory in the Prospector many times, either
on a mock-up or from this control panel while the Prospector was in
the hangar. But he couldn't keep the faint tremor from his hand as he
reached for the first control that would manipulate the machine on the
moon.
The drill had been extended to operating position, but the head had
not yet been energized. Jim touched it to the fine dust of the floor of
the Sea of Rains. The drill went quickly to a depth of eighteen inches
in the dust before it struck something firmer.
"That kills the theory about eighty feet of that stuff, anyway," said Sam
as he read the instruments.
Jim was not interested in depth at this time. He fed some of the
surface material into the laboratory and set the controls to run the
preprogrammed analysis. They waited minutes; then the analysis
began to appear in cryptic symbols on a paper tape.
Jim glanced at it and frowned.
"What's the matter? Isn't it working right?" Sam asked anxiously.
Jim hesitated. "It indicates the presence of several silicates, some
carbonates, and a high percentage of oxides. These are mostly of
sodium, calcium, and iron, as you might expect. But there's
something wrong with your calibration. The atomic and molecular
characteristics aren't coming through right."
"The boys ran checks on the standard samples aboard the
Prospector last night," said Sam. "The results tallied exactly. I'll show
you the tapes."
Jim waited, puzzled, while Sam brought up the check tapes. When he
saw them, he shook his head. "There's a standard calcium carbonate
sample carried aboard the Prospector. Here's a calcium carbonate
picked off the surface. You can see the difference yourself. The
nominal analysis is the same, but the atomic weights and the energy
levels are just slightly different. That doesn't make sense unless your
circuits are out of calibration."
"Let's run another standard sample," said Sam.
Within a few minutes the calibration check had been repeated. Jim
held up the tape. Sam peered over his shoulder. "Just like the first
one," said Sam. "Nothing's wrong with the circuits. Maybe you've got
some new stuff there, that's never been identified before."
"That's hardly possible," said Jim. "There aren't any new elements in
the places where sodium and calcium and silica are supposed to be.
Yet, I don't understand how this can be. If the atomic weights are
different, and the energy levels are different, they have to be different
elements. It doesn't make sense."
"Well, why don't we push on," said Sam, "that is, if you've completed
the surface sampling in this spot. Some samples at lower depths may
give other indications."
Jim agreed. He drove the drill deeper into the face of the moon. At
ten-foot intervals he removed samples and ran them through the
analyzer. The results were the same down to the hundred-foot level.
All results showed common chemical elements with slightly variant
atomic characteristics.
Which made them different chemical elements!
After six hours, Jim stood up from the console and shook his head
wearily. "It's no good, Sam. There's something wrong that I can't put
my finger on. If it isn't in the circuits, I don't know where it is. But
these readings just aren't right. There's no use going deeper until we
find out where the error is."
Sam's face was somber. "There just isn't any error. There can't be.
Unless it was made by whoever put the moon together—"
"Please make a complete check of every analyzer and telemetry
circuit tonight, and we'll try again tomorrow. I want to think about this."
He thought about it, and he dreamed about it. And along about three
o'clock in the morning he sat bolt upright in bed and stared at the dim
moonlight on the opposite wall of the bedroom.
It wasn't possible, he told himself audibly. It just wasn't possible!
Mary stirred and leaned on one elbow beside him. "What's the matter.
Are you having nightmares?"
"Yeah—yeah, I guess I am. I'll be back in a minute, honey." He got up
and padded to the door. "I've got to make a phone call."
"At this time of night?"
But Jim was gone. He turned on the hall light and dialed Sam's
number. After a long time Sam answered sleepily.
"Wake up!" said Jim. "I've just figured it out!"
"Who the devil—? Oh, it's you, Jim. Figured out what? Do you know
what time it is."
"Do you know the results of your calibration re-check?"
"How would I know that? I've got the night crew on it, but I didn't ask
them to report to me in the middle of the night. Go back to bed, and
let's talk about it in the morning."
"They're not going to find anything wrong, Sam."
"I could have told you that."
"But the elements of the moon are different—and there's only one
explanation."
"What?"
"Think about it a minute, Sam. We take a spectrograph of the sun,
and we find the same elements that are here on earth. We turn it on
Alpha Centauri and find the same thing. We turn it to the farthest
stars we can find that give enough light to record by. Always the
same. Calcium is calcium, whether it's on the earth or on a star a half
billion light years away."
"So?" Sam's voice was tired, and he sounded as if he was listening
only because Jim was too good a friend to tell to go to hell for calling
in the middle of the night.
"So? So what?" Sam repeated.
"So we go to the moon," said Jim, "and all of a sudden calcium isn't
calcium, and the sodium on the moon isn't the same as the sodium
on earth and on the sun and on Alpha Centauri and the stars a half
billion light years away. Don't you see what that means!"
"No, I guess not," said Sam dully. "Maybe in the morning—"
"It means the moon just doesn't belong, Sam! It means the moon is
completely foreign to anything in the Solar System, in the whole
galaxy—in any galaxy we have been able to analyze. It means the
moon has come from somewhere else, from a region of space where
atoms and electrons are not even the same as atoms and electrons
here. It must be a somewhere that's so far away it's beyond the edge
of space as we know it!"
"I'll get dressed and come over," said Sam.
Mary made chocolate and toast, and they sat around the kitchen
table thinking and talking of the awesome implications of Jim's theory.
"If what you say is true," said Sam, "it might be that the slightest
contact with any substance of the moon would be sheer poison to a
human being. A returning vessel could never be permitted to enter
the earth's atmosphere, and decontamination would become one of
the major branches of science."
"That's entirely possible. It would complicate enormously the
problems of establishing a moon-base. A speck of moondust inside
the base might be as lethal as an unshielded reactor."
Mary was looking out the kitchen window toward the thin crescent of
moon that was setting over the city. She thought of Allan, who would
soon be voyaging to that alien world. "It's like a trap up there in the
sky. We should never have tried to reach it."
"No—it's not like that at all," said Jim vigorously. "We'll solve whatever
problems we find there. But think of it! We don't have to build a ship
capable of crossing billions of light years of space to see what's out
there. Something from out there has come to us and parked right in
our own front yard. We have a thousand times more reason to go
now!"
Sam toyed with his toast and dunked it in the chocolate. "I think you
ought to keep it quiet—until we really know, don't you."
"Why? I'll run some more tests, sure. I'll plug every loophole there can
possibly be. But unless I find something new I'm going to announce it.
Why shouldn't I?"
"I don't think Hennesey will like it, for one thing. Too sensational.
Even when we actually land there and confirm your analyses by on-
the-spot checks—it's still only a theory that the moon doesn't belong
to this galaxy. You'll never be able to prove that."
"What we've found already is proof enough!"
"Not for Hennesey. He'll ask to see the shipping manifest by which
the moon was transferred here. You know Hennesey."
"Sure, I know Hennesey," said Jim bitterly. "And he doesn't count. Not
in something like this. This is big, and important, and I'm going to
announce it. I want the credit for discovering it. It'll be called
Cochran's Theory, and some University will offer me at least an
honorary Ph.D. Is that bad?"
Sam shook his head. "Of course it's not bad. But I wonder what the
public reaction will be like, and how about Congress—especially if
this business about possible poisoning from moondust turns out to be
correct? There might be a lot of pressure to cut funds and maybe
cancel the whole moon project."
"If moondust is lethal, there's no better time to be warned against it
than right now!"
He spent the following week, eighteen hours a day, at the chemical

analysis panel in the tracking station. As long as the moon was above
the horizon, day or night, he kept experiments going—checking, re-
checking, calibrating, searching for loopholes.
There were no loopholes. There was no malfunction of equipment.
The atoms of the moon's elements were not the same as those of the
rest of the galaxy.
When Allan next came to visit on leave from his own station, Jim told
him what had been found. Allan's face paled a little as he listened in
awe to the story. He stood up and paced across the room as Jim
finished.
"I always knew there would be something—something extra in this,"
he said. "You look up at night and you know the moon can't be just
another piece of earth. Now—you've found out what it is!
"How far could it have come? How old can it be? Imagine stepping
out onto a world so old, from so far away!"
"You haven't heard it all," said Mary tensely.
"There's more?"
"They think perhaps the slightest touch of moon substance may be
lethal."
"We don't know," said Jim hastily. "It's a thought that Sam advanced.
But I think it's quite possible. We won't know until we can run animal
tests. But special precautions will have to be taken to decontaminate
the Apollo after you re-enter with your space-suits."
"This will mean engineering changes. Are they under way?"
"I haven't announced my theory yet. But the necessary changes to
provide for decontamination will have to be made."
"I wanted this as much as you," said Mary. "But now it's gone all
wrong. We should have gone on dreaming about the moon and let it
be a dream that never came true. I'm afraid of it now. No man should
set foot on something so alien and so different."
Allan put an arm around her shoulders and shook her gently. "Sis!
What kind of talk is that? You're talking to the guy who's going to be
the first one to put his foot on the moon."
From the mountain of data accumulated in his experiments, Jim wrote

his paper. Hennesey could control the publication of any material

Organizational Behavior and Management 10Th Edition Ivancevich Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Organizational Behavior and Management 10Th Edition Ivancevich Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Organizational Behavior and

Management 10th Edition Ivancevich

Chapter Seven: Evaluation and Rewards Influence Behavior

After completing this chapter, students should be able to:

job performance—A set of employee work-related behaviors designed to accomplish

Review chapter objectives.

These objectives are revisited on the last slide for the

Organizations use a variety of rewards to attract and retain

To distribute these rewards equitably, it is necessary to

Before individuals can be rewarded, there must be some

We begin this chapter with a look at performance evaluation.

The basic purpose of evaluation, of course, is to provide

Effective performance evaluation is a continuous, ongoing

It has been suggested that performance evaluation is the most

A full treatment of performance evaluation problems and

To the extent that performance is linked with the

Upon the completion of a performance evaluation, the

Performance evaluation feedback is motivational when it

Exhibit 7.1 presents a sample of feedback sources, individual

An increasing number of firms are using multisource

Arguments in Favor of 360-Degree Feedback

Research evidence is still insufficient to support the use of a

Arguments against 360-Degree Feedback

When information is being used to pinpoint performance,

In sum, the 360-degree feedback process, when developed,

Learning experts believe that reinforcement is the most

Reinforcement is an extremely important principle of

Extinction means reducing unwanted behavior. When

It is extremely important to properly time the rewards or

1. Fixed interval. A reinforcer is applied only when the

The main objectives of reward programs are: (1) to attract

Performance results from a combination of the effort of an

Exhibit 7.3 presents a model that attempts to integrate

A significant amount of research has been done on what

. The relationship between rewards and satisfaction is not

The rewards shown in Exhibit 7.3 are classified into two

Financial Rewards: Salary and Wages Money is a major

Completion The ability to start and finish a project or job is

Achievement is a self-administered reward that is derived

Autonomy Some people want jobs that provide them with

Personal Growth The personal growth of any individual is a

The general assumption has been that intrinsic and extrinsic

Basically, the person receiving self-administered feelings of

Managers are faced with the decision of how to administer

Rewards affect employee perceptions, attitudes, and

There is little research on the relationship between rewards

Promotions, increased pay, recognition for a job well done,

This slide supports Exercise 7.1

This slide supports Exercise 7.2

Summary of Key Points

Review and Discussion Questions

1. Evaluations can be either judgmental or developmental in nature. Give examples of when

2. Who should be included in a person’s 360-degree domain when evaluating his/her

4. From a managerial perspective, why is it impractical to provide continuous reinforcement

2. An individual's feelings of satisfaction are influenced by comparisons with what happens to

8. Why are team-based reward systems becoming more widely used?

Exercise 7.1: Diagnosing a Work Performance Problem

The Exercise in Class

Exercise 7.2: Making Choices about Rewards

The Exercise in Class

Case 7.1: The Politics of Performance Appraisal

2. In your opinion, at what point does "fine-tuning" evaluations become unacceptable

Teaching Hints and Tips