Kelman: Pay for performance pays

A new approach to compensation could attract younger employees

Graduate students in my public management survey course opened my eyes recently to how young people think employees should be paid.

We were beginning a series of classes on using metrics as a tool for improving organizational performance. When I teach these classes, I direct the discussion toward ways the managers can improve organizational performance and avoid discussing how managers could use performance metrics to evaluate and reward individual employees.

But this year, the students pushed against my reluctance to discuss performance measures for individuals. They wanted to discuss them, and those who spoke up had strong opinions.

They believe that outstanding achievement should be rewarded, among other ways, with higher pay. They think employees who are outstanding achievers should be rewarded more than those who accomplish less.

And nearly all of them think that the government fails to reward achievement or punish laziness. The government's pay system does not attract these students.

My students' reactions are important in the ongoing debate about pay for performance in government. I have been moderately skeptical about the introduction of this salary philosophy at the Homeland Security and Defense departments.

I worry about the negative effects that individual pay-for-performance schemes could have on teamwork. Success might not motivate pay-for-performance "winners" as much as it would average performers, who might lose their motivation if they fail to get performance bonuses. Studies have shown that average performers tend to think their performance is above-average.

I also worry that too many supervisors might, if allowed, give small rewards to everyone or give all employees turns at getting them.

But my students' reactions made me realize that the government must create a pay-for-performance system that works. These young people are smart and energetic, exactly the kind of employees the government needs.

And they want pay for performance in the organizations where they will work. A government that does not reward performance with higher pay is a turnoff.

Their reactions remind me of scholarly research that shows a significant proportion of productivity and performance gains that come from instituting pay for performance occur because high performers choose to work for organizations that have such pay systems. Such systems encourage low performers to quit.

Creating pay-for-performance systems is never easy. We should, at least at the beginning, limit them to situations where objective performance measures already exist, such as in agencies' Government Performance Results Act plans. And I believe we should peg pay for performance to team performance rather than individual achievement.

My students convinced me that the government cannot ignore this issue.

Kelman is a professor of public management at Harvard University's Kennedy School and former administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. He can be reached at

The Fed 100

Save the date for 28th annual Federal 100 Awards Gala.


  • Social network, census

    5 predictions for federal IT in 2017

    As the Trump team takes control, here's what the tech community can expect.

  • Rep. Gerald Connolly

    Connolly warns on workforce changes

    The ranking member of the House Oversight Committee's Government Operations panel warns that Congress will look to legislate changes to the federal workforce.

  • President Donald J. Trump delivers his inaugural address

    How will Trump lead on tech?

    The businessman turned reality star turned U.S. president clearly has mastered Twitter, but what will his administration mean for broader technology issues?

  • moving ahead

    The bid to establish a single login for accessing government services is moving again on the last full day of the Obama presidency.

  • Shutterstock image (by Jirsak): customer care, relationship management, and leadership concept.

    Obama wraps up security clearance reforms

    In a last-minute executive order, President Obama institutes structural reforms to the security clearance process designed to create a more unified system across government agencies.

  • Shutterstock image: breached lock.

    What cyber can learn from counterterrorism

    The U.S. has to look at its experience in developing post-9/11 counterterrorism policies to inform efforts to formalize cybersecurity policies, says a senior official.

Reader comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group