Human Resource Management
The equity theory asserts that employees maintain a balance what they receive from the employers. As such, a balance of the input to the output should be maintained to ensure efficient productivity of the workers (Al-Zawahreh & Al-Madi, 2012). The level of input in the form of services to the organization and length of services are the variables used to determine the merit raises of these professors. Based on the scenario, Professor Housman would not be satisfied being given a lower salary as compared to Professor Matthews. The University pays Professor Matthews a higher salary even though he does not possess a superior record as compared to Professor Housman. As reflected by the Equity Theory, salaries should be equated to the hierarchy of employment. The superior the employee is, the more he or she should be remunerated. Although the University might have settled on paying Professor Matthews this salary as a way of attracting new professors based on the market rate, some employees such as Professor Housman might feel undermined by being paid less than their juniors hence have low productivity.
The inputs that should determine the merits given to the employees include elements such as flexibility, sacrifice, the level of skills and expertise, personal effort, and tolerance based on the number of years spent working in the institution (Al-Zawahreh & Al-Madi, 2012). The outcome of such elements ranges from job security to salary remuneration. The pay grade of the University should be based on the ranks since ranks determine the elements named above. The higher the rank, the more the responsibilities of the professor hence, the more they should be paid. For instance, Professor Ricks who has stepped down from the rank of Dean of the College and is still paid the salary of this rank reflects on the inequity of salaries remuneration in the University.
Professor Rick’s salary has not been decreased even after stepping down from the administrative job which may show inequity to his colleagues. However, Al-Zawahreh and Al-Madi (2012, p. 164) state, “Equity theory suggests that overpaid workers avoid any inequity reduction techniques that result in… self-esteem… devaluation of a good job outcome…,”, which explains why Professor Ricks’ salary has been left intact even after stepping down. Employees who realize inequity in their workplace seek a way of reducing the inequity, which is either through altering the inputs or the outcomes in mind. Employees such as Professor Housman may want to reduce their inequity hence alter their input, which will negatively affect the performance of the operations in the University. Below is the proposed salary adjustments and rationale.
Table 1: Professor Houseman
| Professor | Houseman |
| Current Salary | $92,000 |
| Teaching | Exceeds |
| Research | Exceeds |
| Service | Meets |
| Proposed Salary adjustment | $97,000 |
Based on the ranking, he has an average performance hence should be paid at least a figure closer to other professors. Based on the equity theory, the salaries paid to the peers should range in a standard bracket. Besides, he has 25 years’ experience in the University, which reflects on tolerance and loyalty which should be rewarded accordingly. Personal effort is reflected by the over 40 articles and 30 presentations prepared. A dollar increment of $4,000 would be worth to ensure satisfaction of Professor Houseman and reward him as per his inputs.
Table 2: Professor Jones
| Professor | Jones |
| Current Salary | $116,000 |
| Teaching | Exceeds |
| Research | Far Exceeds |
| Service | Exceeds |
| Proposed Salary adjustment | $116,000 |
Although Professor Jones is one of the highly ranked professors, his salary reveals overpayment inequity. Based on the Equity theory, the employee input and output should be equal to ensure equity (Al-Zawahreh & Al-Madi, 2012). The moment he stepped down from the department chair, the salary would have been reduced due to reduced responsibility. The salary should be left intact due to the ranking and the grant that was given, but a lack of increment should reflect on the inequity of the salary paid.
Table 3: Professor Ricks
| Professor | Ricks |
| Current Salary | $135,000 |
| Teaching | Meets |
| Research | Meets |
| Service | Far Exceeds |
| Proposed Salary adjustment | $136,000 |
The $20,000 pay cut upon stepping down from administrative position shows equity in salary paid. Since his service far exceeds based on the ranking a $1,000 increment would be worth based on the input reflected by the high ranking of service.
Table 4: Professor Matthews
| Professor | Matthews |
| Current Salary | $97,000 |
| Teaching | New Hire |
| Research | New Hire |
| Service | New Hire |
| Proposed Salary adjustment | $99,000 |
As a new employee, a $2,000 increment would be ideal to ensure satisfaction based on the argument that other employees have received an increment too. Besides, this will be necessary to motivate him to work harder since it is evident great input is rewarded by the University.
Table 4: Professor Karas
| Professor | Karas |
| Current Salary | $100,000 |
| Teaching | Far Exceeds |
| Research | Exceeds |
| Service | Meets |
| Proposed Salary adjustment | $5,400 |
By interviewing for a new job in other Universities, it shows that Professor Karas is not satisfied with the salary and other working conditions. The teaching rank is exemplary thus an increment of $5,400 would be necessary as a reward for this effort. The increment will possible ensure more input and job loyalty.
Table 4: Professor Franks
| Professor | Franks |
| Current Salary | $90,000 |
| Teaching | Meets |
| Research | Fails to meet |
| Service | Exceeds |
| Proposed Salary adjustment | $94,000 |
Based on 18 years work experience in the University, Professor Franks should be very productive if motivated based on the equity sensitive perspective. Other peers are paid more than Professor Franks thus an increment to at least range them in the same pay bracket would be vital. An increment of $4,000 would ensure more input through satisfaction since peers such as Professor Houseman are paid around the same bracket.
Reference
Al-Zawahreh, A., & Al-Madi, F. (2012). The utility of equity theory in enhancing organizational effectiveness. European journal of economics, finance and administrative sciences, 46(2), 158-170.
