A Study of Perceived Effectiveness of Reward and Recognition at Amazon

Abstract

An effective reward and recognition program leads to improved employee morale and productivity. Rewards and recognition are important tools in motivating employees to be productive. From the above recognition of the importance of the two constructs, the study relies on a mixed method approach sought to determine the perceived effectiveness of reward and recognition at Amazon. The study determined that employees at Amazon perceive the reward and recognition programs as ineffective due to irrelevancy, poor timing, employee disappointment, unbalanced application, and favouritism. Despite the above findings, the study also found that when all other factors that may influence employee performance are held constant, the employees at Amazon consider reward and recognition as effective tools for improving performance. The paper is subdivided into the following sections; the introduction, which lays the ground for the subsequent sections; the literature review section containing information on different authors on the subject of discussion; the research methodology section discusses the way the research was carried out, the analysis and discussion of findings section which makes sense of the findings and the conclusion and recommendation section that summarizes main points of discussion in the paper and provide ways forward.

Introduction

According to Dulebohn and Werling (2007), rewarding an employee is a significant component of the effective management of human resources. According to fundamental motivational theories such as Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory, Adams’ (1965) theory of justice, and Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, rewards are important factors in determining whether an individual will be motivated. It is worth mentioning that rewards may be financial or non-financial rewards. The financial rewards are extrinsic rewards and may include salaries and bonuses. The intrinsic non-financial rewards may include appreciation and recognition (Pearce and Bangura, 2019). It has been shown that it may encourage desirable actions and attitudes (such as performance and dedication) and discourage negative behaviours and attitudes (e.g., variation, absenteeism; Williams et al., 2006). However, there are two main gaps in the literature on reward outcomes. Firstly, the emphasis has historically been on monetary benefits. In recent years, academics and professionals have emphasised the significance of concentrating on non-monetary rewards (e.g., (Koo et al., 2020; Kumari et al., 2021). Second, Lekić et al. (2019) explain that academics have generally concentrated on identifying the link between compensation, reward satisfaction, and performance for the “average” worker, neglecting the notion that individual perception may play a part in the debate.

From a more pragmatic standpoint, businesses need to improve their knowledge of individual differences in how various rewards affect employee retention and performance. This is especially the case when taking into consideration the growing economic pressure to be efficient and the competition for talented employees (Kumari et al., 2021). Jeff Bezos founded Amazon in July 1994 (Stone, 2022). Originally, the site was supposed to be named Cadabra, a play on the phrase abracadabra, but the resemblance to the word cadaver led to a name change. Amazon was chosen because it provided the firm with a feeling of grandeur, and a name beginning with “A” was advantageous for appearing towards the top of alphabetised lists of websites. Initially, the site concentrated on selling books and used the slogan “World’s largest bookshop” (Schmidt, 2020). In this research, we will explore how Amazon’s incentive management is viewed by its employees in terms of their intrinsic motivation and how this perception correlates with organisational production. The paper argues that the perception of employee reward and recognition at Amazon is that they improve employee retention, cultivate a culture of self-improvement among the employees, enhance team effort, provide a sense of accomplishment among employees, and boost employee morale which increases employee performance.

Statement of the Problem

While the growth of Amazon company is widely documented, there is little writing on how the employees that help built it to what it is today were motivated to help in its growth. Further, there is little information on how the employees perceive the reward and recognition programs initiated by the company or whether there are the reward and recognition programs are present. The lack of knowledge on the effectiveness of the recognition and reward programs makes it difficult for the company to act on the program to improve employee performance.

Justification of the Study

The study is justified on the ground that it provides comprehensive information on the perception of the effectiveness of the reward and recognition program at Amazon that the company can use to improve the performance of its employees. The study is also justified on the ground that it will provide valuable information that researchers and students can use in the future.

Hypothesis

The paper hypothesises that when all other factors that may influence employee performance are held constant, the employees at Amazon consider reward and recognition as effective tools for improving performance.

Research Questions

1. What are the reward management policies in place at Amazon?
2. How do Amazon’s employees perceive the reward management policies?
3. How the reward systems influence Amazon’s employees’ motivation and

Aims and Objectives

The research project aims to examine the reward management programs in place at Amazon and how employees perceived their effectiveness in their motivation in relation to their performance.

A successful research aim, as stated by Mills et al. (2010), should address which challenges are implicated within the framework of the project. In addition to this, it must be practical, attainable, clear, and enlightening.

1. To determine and describe the reward management policies and programs at Amazon
2. To map out Amazon’s employees’ perception of the company’s reward management policies and programs
3. To determine the reward systems’ influence on Amazon’s employees’ motivation and performance outcomes.

Chapter Breakdown

Chapter one: Introduction

This chapter contextualises the study by giving a brief overview and historical background of the research topic.

Chapter two: Literature Review

The section provides an understanding of the topic of study based on the available written work. The section provides a relationship among the previously written work on employee perception of the effectiveness of reward and recognition programs on their performance. It identifies the areas of convergence and divergence in pieces written on the topic. The section determines gaps in the literature on the topic and helps familiarise with the currently available knowledge.

Chapter three: Research Design & Methodology

The chapter analyses, examine and interrogate how the data used in the study was collected, processed, analysed, and presented.

Chapter four: Analysis & Discussion of Finding

The chapter describes what the researcher did with the data collected and the meaning the researcher gives the data collected. The chapter makes sense of the information collected and analysed.

Chapter five: Conclusion and Recommendations

The chapter wraps up everything discussed within the paper. The chapter also identifies the data collected’s implications and recognises the study’s limitations.

Chapter six: Critical Reflection on Skills Development

The chapter reflects on the entire research process and the personal and professional development throughout the process. The chapter also describes how the researcher engaged with the project.

Literature Review

Introduction To the Literature Review

The literature review section provides various perspectives from the research that has been written on the subject of discussion. The section relies on books, journal articles, working papers, and reports. The search for the books, papers and reports from online databases was effectuated through the use of Boolean operators AND, OR, and NOT (Aliyu, 2017). The Boolean operators ensured that only the search results that were relevant to the study were shown.

Reward and Recognition Conceptualized

P. (2013) explains that rewards are formal and, most of the time, impartial, equitable exchange at the workplace. According to the author, a reward is a token of appreciation from an employer that is pegged on the employee’s performance. P. (2013) believes that recognition, on the other hand, is a return on the effort put by an employee toward certain actions. Tirta and Enrika (2020) agree with P. (2013) and explain that the concepts of reward and recognition as the effort that an employer puts in place to appreciate the employees for their involvement in specific actions that positively affect an organisation. Tirta and Enrika (2020) argue that rewards can be explicit or implicit. Accordingly, explicit rewards are in the form of salary, and implicit rewards are in the form of recognition or appreciation. According to Tirta and Enrika (2020), recognition can be part of a reward. A similar perception is held by Ndungu (2017), who argues that recognition is a form of reward. Tessema et al. (2014) assert that recognition is based on the relationship between the employee and the employer, the organisation and the employee, employees and their co-workers, and employees and external partners. Meena et al. (2019) conceptualise recognition as a decision on an employee’s action based on their importance to the company.

Impact of Reward and Recognition.

Meena et al. (2019) argue that reward and recognition are tools to motivate employees to work hard or improve their performance. According to the authors, employers use to reward and recognition programs to propel employees to perform. Alghamdi (2015); Guo et al. (2015); Watkins and Fusch (2022) argue that rewards and recognition are programs that employers use to ensure that there is job satisfaction among the employees and that they remain productive. The authors argue that when employees are rewarded and recognised equally and fairly, the employee retention rate within an organisation increases. Watkins and Fusch (2022) argue that rewards and recognitions help increase the level of employee engagement and create a positive working environment. Watkins and Fusch (2022) assert that rewards and recognition instil a sense of purpose in the employees and boost team productivity. Koo et al. (2020); Ozturk and Karatepe (2019) argue that recognition and rewards and recognition reduce presenteeism and absenteeism and increase the time the employees spend working. According to the authors, rewards and recognition promote creative performance among employees. Koo et al. (2020) assert that rewards and recognition reduce burnout and increase employee commitment to the employer or an organisation. Employees committed to specific employers or organisations are more likely to aid or help the organisation grow or be productive.

Effectiveness of Rewards and Recognition

Amoatemaa and Kyeremeh (2016) explain that reward or recognition is only effective if it helps the company to achieve its goals. According to the authors, the effectiveness of the reward and the recognition varies from one company to another, depending on the company’s objectives. Madhani (2020) asserts that while the effectiveness of the reward and recognition programs may differ, the final objective of the business organisation is to be productive. According to the author, while the short-term indicators of effectivity of the rewards and recognition programs may vary, they all align to one final objective. Accordingly, the author asserts that productivity is the key reward and recognition performance indicator. An increase in productivity at the organisation upon implementing reward and recognition programs shows that they are productive. Phillips et al. (2017) argue that the short-term key performance indicators of an effective reward and recognition program include improved employee morale, job satisfaction, collaboration among employees, reduced absenteeism and presenteeism and increased employee engagement. According to Phillips et al. (2017), rewards and recognition are only effective if the employees perceive them to be fair and equal and whether they meet the employee’s needs.

According to Singh (n.d.), effective reward and recognition programs must reflect the cultures of the organisations in which they are to be implemented. The programs must integrate well with an organisation’s basic values and beliefs and align with the nature of the organisation’s business. Further, the programs must align with the business goals and strategy of the company. A failure to align with goals and strategy does not ensure productivity and minimises the impact of the programs. According to Singh (n.d.), the absence of fairness and the presence of bias hurt the workers’ perception and efficacy of the reward and recognition programs. Accordingly, the presence of bias can be indicated by inadequate external parity, insufficient internal equity, and impartiality in the assessment process. Other factors that result in biased practices include; insufficient clarity on the services or outputs that attract rewards and recognition and lack of transparency on why certain employees are rewarded and others are recognised. Singh (n.d.) argues that mostly non-monetary recognition remains unexploited. Singh (n.d.) asserts that recognition can be given in public or private, does not require a huge budget, does not necessarily have to come from the management but can also come from peers, and can be practised frequently to reinforce certain habits.

Hancock (2022) agrees with Singh (n.d.) and explains that empowering employees makes recognition and rewards practices more effective. Hancock (2022) further agrees with Singh (n.d.) that involving the employees in determining what recognition and reward programs are to be implemented in particular organisations and for particular actions increases their effectiveness. Unilateral decisions on what recognition and reward programs are to be implemented in a particular organisation make such programs unpopular as they do not meet the needs and wants of the workers for whom they are designed. Hancock (2022) explains that using rewards and recognition programs to drive change in behaviour amongst employees is more efficient than when used solely to increase productivity. Changing behaviours go beyond just increasing the number of sales or increasing productivity; it forms the culture of an organisation. Smith (2014), on the other hand, argues that making recognition and rewards more individualised or personalised increases their effectiveness. According to Smith (2014), the rewards and recognition should match the workers’ needs and personalities without being unfair or biased. A balance between fair and personalised rewards and recognition ensures that the programs have meaning for the workers who receive them. Smith (2014) asserts that rewards and recognition programs should set realistic employee targets and goals. There is no point or benefit in setting unachievable objectives for the workers. Unrealistic goals do not motivate employees. Smith (2014) further argues that reward and recognition programs should strike a balance between individual and group achievements. Focusing solely on individual achievement may harm team performance and reduce the collaboration between employees, as each will be focused on earning the rewards as individuals and not as a team.

Characteristics Of The Positively Perceived Reward And Recognition Programs

Singh (n.d.) asserts that for a reward or a recognition to be positively perceived by workers or employees, they must be considered to be distributive and just. As such, the reward and recognition system must distribute the resources proportionate to the gains that the company and the other stakeholders in the organisation receive. Distributive justice ensures that the procedure for awarding rewards and recognitions is fair and that it is proportionate. Singh (n.d.) explains that the rewards and recognition programs must be procedurally just and fair for them to be accepted by the employees and regarded as effective. Singh (n.d.) argues that the rewards and recognition programs must possess interactional justice; those who receive the rewards and recognition must feel that the awards come from the heart and not a mere procedure to persuade them to be productive. Further, everyone must feel that they have an equal chance of being rewarded or recognised. Programs that provide employees with an equal chance of success are widely considered effective, even if they are not effective in reality. Li et al. (2017) argue that effective reward and recognition programs must also determine reliable measures and standards. Reliable measures and standards allow the employees to track their progress towards the goals that earn them the rewards. A reward or recognition program that does not have reliable measurements and standards frustrate the employees. The result is the employees disengage from such programs leading to failure. Li et al. (2017) explain that rewards and recognitions are considered unfair when no standards exist, and many employees rebel against them. Li et al. (2017) explain that the problem of standards and measures can be adequately addressed by involving employees in designing and implementing reward and recognition programs within an organisation.

Theories of employee perception of Rewards and Recognition

According to Shaikh and Nawar (2018), the theories of employee perception include the Attribution Theory, Adams Equity Theory’, ‘Two-Factor Theory’, ‘And a theory of the Hierarchy of Needs. On the other hand, Liu et al. (2021) argue that social cognitive theory defines the parameters of employee perception. According to Liu et al. (2021), social cognitive theory stipulates that employee cognition and their behaviour after that result from their perception of how embedded they are in a social group. Liu et al. (2021) explain that employees who perceive themselves as being of high status in an organisation or workplace show confidence in their dealings, while employees who do not consider much of themselves within an organisation have little confidence. The level of confidence affects the employees’ performance. The author explains that the employees’ perception of anything at work affects their self-efficacy. According to Liu et al. (2021), employee perception plays a huge role in evaluating their ability and, therefore, their output. (Liu et al., 2021) argue that employees of high status are proactive at the workplace because they experience more work vitality than their counterparts.

Lăzăroiu (2015); Ryan (2016), (2023) explain that the Adams equity theory stipulates a balance between employee input in the form of hard work, skill level, and enthusiasm against the output in the form of salary, and other intangibles in the form or reward and recognition. Lăzăroiu (2015); Ryan (2016), (2023) assert that determining a fair balance between input and output results in a productive workforce. According to Lăzăroiu (2015); Ryan (2016), (2023), Adam’s equity theory acknowledges that subtle factors such as recognition and reward affect employee perception at the workplace. Lăzăroiu (2015), and Ryan (2016), (2023) argue that Adam’s equity theory recognises that employees become demotivated when their input outweighs their output. The Adams equity theory asserts that employees are expected to respond differently to the employee input and output imbalance. Some become annoyed, others are demoralised, and others reduce their work effort. Ryan (2016) asserts that the main assertion of the Adams equity theory is that for employees to be motivated, they need to have the perception of the rewards and recognition that they receive for their work is fair. According to the theory, if the employees perceive the rewards and the recognitions they receive to be unfair, they act in a manner that allows them to correct the unfairness.

Amoako (2011) asserts that the Two-Factor Theory developed by Frederick Herzberg opines that an organisation motivates employees when it allows them to be faced with challenging jobs but provides them with an opportunity to be rewarded and recognised. According to Koncar et al. (2022), when employees perceive that their efforts are rewarded and recognised, they become satisfied and motivated to perform their jobs. According to the theory, the factors that show job satisfaction and those that lead to job satisfaction are completely different. The opposite of job satisfaction is no job satisfaction and not “not job satisfaction”. The Two-Factor Theory’ assumes that hygiene factors and motivational factors are the two factors that affect employee performance. The theory explains that the hygiene factors are those which, if absent, may cause the employee to be unwell and reduce their productivity. Motivational factors, on the other hand, are factors that motivate employees to perform better.

According to Shaver (2016); Hewett et al. (2018); Spilka et al. (2019), the attribution theory attempts to document how individuals interpret and relate to the social environment. The theory examines how people, including employees, translate occurrences around them and how such translation affects their actions and thinking. According to the attribution theory, external and internal factors affect an employee’s perception (Icfai Business School, n.d.; Shaver, 2016; Spilka et al., 2019). The external factors are those beyond the employee’s control, while the internal factors are those within the employee’s control. The external factors are also known as situational attribution, while the internal factors are known as dispositional attributions. According to Shaver (2016); Hewett et al. (2018); Spilka et al. (2019), the process of attribution occurs in three stages; the first stage is perception, where the employee observes the action or behaviour; the judgement stage, where there are deliberations on the intentionality of the behaviour and finally the attribute stage where the employee determines whether the actor was forced to act or not. Shaver (2016); Hewett et al. (2018); Spilka et al. (2019) explain that three factors affect attribution: consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus. Consistency refers to a parttern in the employee’s behaviour, distinctiveness entails the employee showing different behaviours when exposed to different factors, and consensus means that all the employees would have behaved the same way had they been subjected to the same situation.

Research Methodology

Rosenstein (2019) proposes that research design relates to the research process, including participant recruitment and assignment, administration of experimental procedures (if any), data collecting, analysis, and interpretation. The two main methodologies used in research are quantitative and qualitative methodology. Quantitative research is one which is expressed in numbers and graphs. The data relied upon in a quantitative approach are numerical and are used to generalise a fact (McNabb, 2016). The quantitative approach focuses on testing new hypotheses; the data is analysed through mathematical and statistical formulas, and the approach is often objective (McNabb, 2016). The qualitative approach, on the other hand, relies on non-numerical data. Concepts, opinions, symbols, metaphors and definitions characterise qualitative methodology. The qualitative approach also entails a description of things and relationships. Qualitative research also enables researchers to generate theories from the data they collect (Aspers and Corte, 2019; Eyisi, 2016; Noyes et al., 2019). It is worth mentioning that qualitative methodology is often subjective as it relies on people’s perceptions of the phenomenon under study. Qualitative methodology situates human behaviour and thought within social contexts to provide an understanding of the subjects under study. While the quantitative methodology has the advantage of replicability, the qualitative methodology has the disadvantage of not being replicable (McNabb, 2016). Further, the fact that qualitative data is often subjective limits such methodology to only a small population. The quantitative methodology has the disadvantage of not taking into consideration the social context in which research is being carried out and also starts from a predetermined hypothesis and therefore does encourage imagination and creativity.

The current study adopts a mixed-method approach. The mixed method approach was adopted because it allows the researcher to combine the strengths of the qualitative and quantitative approaches while at the same time eliminating the disadvantages of the two methodologies (McKim, 2017; Morse, 2016). The mixed methodology allows the use of numerical and non-numerical data in the Study (Creswell, 2013; Fetters et al., 2013). For the collection of data, the study relied on a survey. A survey was adopted because of its greater statistical power, ability to gather information and the fact that there are pre-existing survey models (Mitchell and Carson, 2013; Ponto, 2015). From the above, it is evident that surveys are dependable, flexible, and extensive. It is to be noted that surveys are less costly and, therefore, appropriate for the small budgetary allocation at the researcher’s disposal.

The survey method allowed the researcher to collect primary data. Collecting information directly from the respondents allowed the researcher to get information from sources that directly address the research questions and objectives (Schuurman and Eijkman, 2013). Further, collecting primary data from persons with relevant information ensures that the study obtains information unavailable anywhere else. Primary data also ensured that the collected information was objective and specific (Clabough et al., 2015). Further, primary information collected through the survey provides new information on the topic.

The study relied on a case study approach as a method. The method was adopted because it allows the researcher to contextualise the study and apply theory in practice. The study also used the case study approach because it allowed the researcher to produce useable data, turn opinions into facts, and be comprehensive (Crowe et al., 2011). The case study approach also allows the researcher to reduce bias in the study. Further, the case study approach allowed the researcher to understand the social phenomenon under study in its natural place of existence (Crowe et al., 2011). From the above assertion, it is apparent that the case study was the most suitable approach to understanding workers’ perception of rewards recognition. The approach gives the researcher a chance to breathe life into the abstract information on how workers view reward management and how this impacts their level of motivation by having a real-life situation. Additionally, the case study approach allows the research to produce data that can be useful to an organisation, which in this context is Amazon. Concentrating on Amazon ensures that research is focused. Amazon forms the focus of the study because it is a global empire, and the majority of organisations around the world can use lessons from it.

Sampling Method

The study relied on the purposive sampling method to identify the participant in the research. The purposive sampling method is a non-probability sampling technique that allows the researcher to identify the participants based on their unique characteristics relevant to the subject Study (Campbell et al., 2020; Etikan et al., 2016; Rai and Thapa, 2015). In the case of the study, the unique characteristic was being an employee of Amazon. The sampling method will be used because it allows for the selection of unique and informative cases, allows the researcher to reach a specialised group of people, and allows for the collection of specific information. The participation qualification for this study was that one must be an employee of Amazon to participate in the study. Only persons who work at Amazon have intimate knowledge of the working of reward and recognition programs at the organisation. As such, the survey questions were distributed online to only Amazon employees.

Data Analysis

The study relied on thematic, content analysis, and ground theory to analyse the data collected. The thematic analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data collected, while the content analysis applies to both qualitative and quantitative data. The two analysis methods allowed the researcher to identify patterns and themes throughout the data collected (Neuendorf, 2018). On the other hand, grounded theory allows for the generation of theories and data analysis while the collection process is still ongoing (Glaser and Strauss, 2017). All the data analysis methods shall complement each other.

Research Paradigm

The study adopted the interpretivism paradigm. The interpretivism approach stipulates that reality is fallible, subjective, and results from social construction. The paradigm asserts that it is impossible to achieve objective truth (Alharahsheh and Pius, 2020). The above approach elaborates and explains social constructs such as perception. The study adopted the approach because perception is not a scientifically verifiable concept but a social construct.

Ethical Considerations

During the research, the researcher ensured that informed consent of the participants was procured, that the participants voluntarily agreed to participate in the study, that the personal information of the participants was anonymised, that there was confidentiality, and that no harm came to the participants (Connelly, 2014). Another ethical consideration during the study was that the communication of the results to the participants be made. For the secondary information, all the sources were properly acknowledged. It is worth mentioning that informed consent entailed telling the participants in the study about all that the study involves before allowing them to decide to participate. Voluntarily agreeing to participate mainly involves the fact that the participants were free to opt out of the study at any given time. Anonymisation and confidentiality shall ensure that the personal information of the participants is not revealed to unauthorised persons.

Validity and reliability of the study

Validity refers to the extent to which the research methods used to measure what they were supposed to measure. Reliability refers to consistency that allows for the reproduction of research or Study (Heale and Twycross, 2015; Taherdoost, 2016). The study relied on a strong, suitable research design, an appropriate study sample, and methods to ensure reliability and validity. Further, the study was consistent and carefully carried out.

Analysis & Discussion of Findings

The study set out to determine and describe the reward management policies and programs at Amazon, to map out Amazon’s employees’ perception of the company’s reward management policies and programs and to determine the reward systems’ influence on Amazon’s employees’ motivation and performance outcomes. To achieve the above objectives, the study relied upon secondary data from the literature review and primary data from the survey. The paper relied on a mixed methods approach to capture the strengths of qualitative and quantitative approaches. It is through the mixed approach that the study provides a comprehensive analysis and in-depth discussion on the subject of the study. The responses were collected through an online survey tool, percentages of the common responses were calculated, and charts were drawn as indicated in the appendix. It is from these charts and response percentages that the analysis and discussions section is written. The section is organized along with the themes that came out from the data collected. The themes include demography, an understanding of employee reward, the importance of employee reward and recognition, Amazon employee reward and recognition programs, perception of employee rewards and recognition at Amazon, and challenges Amazon faces in implementing the employee reward programs. The section analyses the primary data from the survey and situates the discussion within the information collected from the books, journals and reports on the same.

Demography

From the data collected from the survey, as shown in Appendix A, the majority of the respondents in the survey were men. 53% of the participants in the survey were men. Those who outrightly identified themselves as women were only 25%, with about 21% of the participants choosing not to reveal the gender that they identify with. The ethnicity was a bit balanced between the whites and the blacks, with the blacks being 36% and the whites being 34%. 23% were from a mixed group. Other ethnicities that were part of the group included Arabs and Somalis. 42% of the respondents had vocational training, with only 18% having gone to college. Most respondents were clerks; they made up about 82% of the participants.

With the population of the respondents being dominated by the male gender, the results and the behavioural patterns in the answers to the rest of the questions that the study relied upon may take a gendered approach. The result that shows that many men participated in the survey contradicts studies on male and female gender likelihood to participate in surveys that indicate that females are more likely than men to participate in surveys (Smith, n.d.). If the study by Smith (n.d.). is to be taken as the benchmark, then the current demographic results, especially on the gender of the respondents, become an outlier. Taken as an outlier, the high percentage of men participating in the study increases the study’s variability and statistical power (Osborne and Overbay, n.d.). A concern with the higher number of male participants is that it may represent a biased hiring process at Amazon. It may signify a male-dominated hiring process. The ethnicity is fairly representative. Except that the tendency of the Somalis to identify themselves as Somalis and not black or Arabs reinforce the ideology that they feel not black enough nor Arab enough (Hayow, 2018). The more concerning aspect of the demographic data shown in appendix A is that most respondents are clerks. While the education level data may explain why most of the respondents hold low-level jobs, it does not show why all of them had to be clerks. The graph below puts the percetages into perspective.

Figure 1. Job descriptions

The above graph shows a situation where the data collected may be the same because a majority of the respondents hold the same position and therefore have similar experiences.

Conceptualization of Employee Reward and Recognition

Appendix A on survey results indicates that many respondents consider employee rewards as bonuses for reaching targets and professional development activities. Most respondents conceptualize recognition as making the workplace inclusive and appreciating the employees. The above findings concur with those from the literature review that indicated that concepts of reward and recognition as the effort that an employer puts in place to appreciate the employees for their involvement in specific actions that positively affect an organization (Tirta and Enrika, 2020). Most of Amazon’s employees want to feel appreciated and a workplace that supports all kinds of differences. For rewards, the employees consider themselves rewarded when paid bonuses for reaching their targets. A good number also prefer personal development and gifts. Profit sharing as a reward is low on the list, with only about 6% of the respondents arguing for it. The little preference for profit sharing may be a result of the level that most of the participants in the study are in within the organization. Workers at the lower levels in employment or those not in management have little regard for profit sharing (Ana Kurtulus et al., n.d.). Therefore, the conceptualization of rewards and recognition is tied to the type and the level of job a person carries out within an organization.

Importance/Impact of Reward and Recognition Programs

The survey results indicate that 41% of the respondents believe that the main importance of the reward and recognition programs is that they connect the employees with the company. Many respondents also indicated that the reward and recognition programs improve employee performance. The rest indicated that rewards and recognition promote employee engagement and retention. The finding shows that Amazon employees consider rewards and recognition as a motivational factors. Employees must be motivated to feel connected to the company enough to improve its games and performance. The findings support the argument put forward by Pearce and Bangura (2019), who explain that recognition provides employees with non monetary motivation while rewards provide tangible and monetary motivation to work hard and meet a company’s objectives. Connectedness with the company means the employees feel a sense of belonging and own the organization’s successes and failures. When employees are motivated enough to own an organization’s success and failures, they become creative and innovative in trying to find solutions to problems facing the organization (Studwell, 2013). The finding reinforces and reaffirms the study’s hypothesis that having reward programs in an organization motivates the employees to work harder and achieve the sets of objectives and aims.

Amazon’s Employee Reward And Recognition Programs

Rewards and recognition programs take many forms. The forms that the rewards and recognition programs take depend on factors such as organizational culture, the company’s objectives and the resources available for such programs. The study results show that at Amazon, the leading recognition and reward programs include; recognition, fringe benefits and an increase in salary. Fringe benefits include non-salary benefits such as health insurance that employees get. 51% of the employees at Amazon who participated in the study, an increased salary is the company’s most common reward and recognition program. The above means that the company focuses on extrinsic motivators more than intrinsic motivators. The shortcoming of overreliance on extrinsic motivators is that it kills the employees’ self-esteem; it minimizes the employee’s ability to enjoy the job they are doing intrinsically. Eventually, the employees break down and can not perform anymore (Chang and Teng, 2017). The reward and recognition programs should be balanced; both extrinsic and intrinsic motivators should be applied equally. The finding in this context supports the narrative by Singh (n.d.) in the literature review section that alludes to the fact that reward and recognition programs must reflect the cultures of the organizations in which they are to be implemented. In this situation, the rewards and the recognition programs reflect the culture at Amazon, where monetary rewards are prioritized over recognition programs.

Perception Of Employee Rewards And Recognition At Amazon

The perception of the rewards and recognition programs’ effectiveness at Amazon forms the study’s crust. Different questions ranging from meaningfulness to employee participation in designing the reward and recognition programs at Amzaon contained in the survey From the design of the questions, it was evident that perception is a subjective construct that varies from one person to another depending on how they interpret a situation. A similar scenario does not necessarily produce similar interpretations from different people interacting with it. A direct question as to what is the perception of employee rewards and recognition programs at Amazon was asked of the respondents; startling enough, the majority of the respondents indicated that the programs create a negative impression. 53% of the respondents indicated that they had a negative impression of the programs. Only 20% believed that the programs motivated them while about 27% indicated that the programs made them feel valued. The finding contradicts the overall accepted notion indicated in the literature review that most employees positively perceive the rewards and the programs. The answers to the other questions on the perception of recognition and reward programs at Amazon may shed light on why most employees have a negative perception of rewards and recognition, especially the response that the employees provided on the meaningfulness of the rewards and recognition programs at the company. 60% of the respondents indicated that the rewards and recognition programs at Amazon are slightly meaningless. Cumulatively, about 68% of the respondents do not find the programs meaningful. The inference that can be made from the above situation is that the rewards and recognition programs at Amazon are out of sync with the needs and wants of the customers. as the literature review revealed, recognition and reward programs are only effective if they are appreciated by the workers (Singh, n.d.). Recognition and rewards should be employee centred and not abstractly created with consideration of the impact that it has on the people it should motivate. A mismatch between the programs and what the employees consider important results in the programs not performing the function for which they were designed.

A further, the employee behaviour that is recognized is also important in designing a reward and recognition program. The study found that the most rewarded employee behaviour is a meeting of a target. While the primary objective of any organization is to be productive, rewarding and recognizing behaviour that does not motivate the employees results in disasters. A company or organization may find ways of indirectly motivating employees to be productive (Singh, n.d.). Instead of rewarding the meeting of targets, the company can reward other actions associated with meeting objectives that the employees want to be recognized and have the employee meet targets as a result of being rewarded and recognized in areas that are important to them. The dislike or disbelief in the recognition and reward programs is evidenced by about 45% not knowing whether the programs motivate people. An additional 25% of the respondents outrightly disagreed with the notion that the reward programs motivate them. The statistic here is appalling; for every 100 people at the company, 65 have no idea whether the rewards and recognition programs motivate them or know that the programs do not motivate them. The above number is huge and reflects the fact that the company may be forcing some of the programs on the employees. According to Dobbin and Kalev (2016), programs implemented at companies often fail because the companies and those responsible for managing them fail to consider the needs and wants of the employees. The management in such situations lifts programs from other companies without contextualizing the programs implemented at their companies. The lack of involvement of the employees in the designing and implementation of reward programs at Amazon as shown by only 21% of the respondents indicating that they had been involved, further explains the unpopularity of the programs at the company. The findings show that the company totally disregards the opinions of the employees.

Apart from the company’s disregard for the employees’ input, whenever there is any input, the company does not create any balance on the input. Only 27 out of the 100 respondents who participated in the study indicated that the company at least showed some balance when it came to employee input. The above finding implies that the company favours input from certain employees when it comes to designing and implementing reward and recognition programs. Bias in decision-making results in resentment among employees, thereby explaining the negative perception that the employees at Amazon have toward the programs that the company puts in place (Sharma et al., 2014; Shepherd et al., 2015). 35% of the employees also indicated that employee reward and recognition are not handled the same way for all employees. Another 33% of the participants also indicated that they were not in a position to tell whether rewards and recognitions were handled the same way for all the employees. The study draws a conclusion from the above result: a systemic culture of favouritism in the company when it comes to implementing rewards and recognition. Favouritism leads to a lack of trust in the management and resentment. Further, employees comparing themselves to the favoured employees end up having low self-esteem and therefore, become less productive and disappointed (Abun, n.d.). The scenario explains why about 66% of the employees interviewed are disappointed with the reward and recognition programs at the company. The above scenario also gives the impression that Amazon has no inclusivity, as some employees are favoured for some reasons. Only 36% of the respondents indicated that their overall perception of the effectiveness of the reward and recognition programs at Amazon is positive. When a company initiates a program that cannot gain more than fifty percent support from its employees, it can be inferred that the program is not fulfilling its targets (Abun, n.d.). Given that 63% of the respondents agree that employee reward and recognition improve employee morale, the disappointment witnessed at Amazon may be a result of factors such as favouritism, inadequate involvement of the employees and mismatch between the rewards and the needs of the employees. Therefore, the findings support the findings from the literature review that effective reward and recognition programs include improved employee morale. Phillips et al. (2017) explain that an effective reward and recognition program must not disregard the employees’ input. As Hancock (2022) and Singh (n.d.) assert, if the reward and recognition programs disappoint the employees, there is no way they will be productive.

Challenges That Amazon Faces in Trying to Implement the Employee Reward Programs

According to the responses from the survey, the majority of the respondents indicated that disappointment from the employees was the main challenge that the company was facing when it came to rewards and recognition programs. The disappointment is evidence of employee dissatisfaction with their current jobs (Davis, 2015; Inuwa, 2016). The other problems the company faced included relevance and inappropriate timing. Evidently, the negative perception of the employee reward and recognition programs at Amazon stems from the company’s inability to involve the employees, create relevant reward and recognition packages and correct time the programs. It is arguable that the challenges Amazon faces regarding rewards and recognition programs are self-inflicted. A little research into their employees would reveal how best to address the issue of rewards and recognition. The challenges further cement the fact that the employees at Amazon perceive the reward and recognition programs at the company to be less effective. A disappointment rate of 66% among employees indicates that the company is totally getting it wrong when it comes to rewarding and recognizing the employees. A full chart of the percentages on disappointment and other factors contributing to the negative perception of the reward and recognition programs at Amazon is in Appendix A.

Conclusion & Recommendations

In conclusion, the study has successfully determined and described the reward management policies and programs at Amazon, mapping out Amazon’s employees’ perception of the company’s reward management policies and programs and determining the reward systems’ influence on Amazon’s employees’ motivation and performance outcomes. On describing the reward management policies and programs at Amazon, the study successfully determined that the policies and practices at Amazon when it comes to rewards and recognition programs are biased, irrelevant and insensitive to the employees at the company. The study determined that the practices at the company are not balanced, leading to the employees being disappointed in the programs. On mapping out Amazon’s employees’ perception of the company’s reward management policies and programs, the study determined that while the employees recognize that rewards and recognition can boost their morale and increase their productivity, they are disappointed with the programs at Amazon. The employees believe that they cannot be termed effective because of favouritism, bad timing, irrelevancy and lack of balance when it comes to applying for the programs. The employees have a negative perception of the reward and recognition programs. In their own view, the reward and recognition system at Amazon is not achieving the objectives which it was designed to achieve.

Despite the negative perception that the employees of Amazon associate with the reward and recognition programs at Amazon, it is evident that the paper’s hypothesis that when all other factors that may influence employee performance are held constant, the employees at Amazon consider reward and recognition as effective tools for improving performance still holds. The problem with the current Amazon rewards and recognition problem is the design and the mode of implementation that has left the employees disappointed. Rewards and recognition as a concept is appreciated by the employees, but when situated and contextualized within the confines of Amazon as a company, the construct fails to deliver what, in theory, it should deliver. As seen in the discussion section, the employees who consider reward and recognition programs do not have any regard for their input.

While the study has successfully achieved its objectives, the study has some shortcomings. The study relies on a study sample that is too small to be assumed to apply to all Amazon employees. Amazon has many employees, and a sample of a hundred people does not necessarily represent the popular view of the company. Connected to the small sample is the fact that over 80% of the participants in the study were clerks. Therefore, the outcomes document in the paper may merely represent the clerks’ view and not the entire Amazon workforce. It is also worth mentioning that the majority of the participants in the study were male, and as such, the results may only represent the male workers’ perception of the recognition and reward programs at Amazon. Further, while the study produces actionable information for Amazon, the study is too focused on a single company that the result may not be applicable to other companies across the globe.

Having documented the study’s shortcomings, the paper recommends that Amazon take into account the employees’ input when designing the company’s reward and recognition programs. Further, the paper recommends that the company make the reward system balanced, relevant and timely. Most of the resentment and disappointment towards the reward and recognition programs at Amazon is due to the company management’s failure to take into consideration the employees’ input. The start to correcting the mess is by considering the employees’ inputs.

For future research on the same, the study recommends that future studies increase the study population to a number representative of the entire employee population. A large study population ensures the findings’ accuracy and makes it easier for the researcher to identify outliers. A large population sample also makes it easier to estimate or apply the finding to the entire population under study (Biau et al., n.d.). Further, future studies should use the stratified sampling method to ensure that all groups within the organization are represented. The stratified sampling method allows the researcher to classify or group the study population into groups that share some characteristics and then draw participants from the cluster (Acharya et al., 2013). The above move shall ensure that each group, from the management to the clerks, is equally represented. Finally, the paper suggests that given that Amazon is a global company with operations across the globe, having a sample taken from each of the areas in which the company operates would increase the validity and reliability of the study. The above can be easily achieved due to advancements in technology that allow surveys to be carried out online, and the researcher can administer them from the comfort of their homes.

Critical Reflection on Skills Development

The process of carrying out and preparing the research report was highly engaging and challenging. This section provides a reflection on the entire process from the interaction with the supervisor, and the respondents, the extent to which the research objectives were met, the employability skills gained from the process, and the potential contribution of the research. The section provides personal insight into the entire research process and its impact. The section narrates my personal feelings and reactions toward specific aspects of the research process. It documents how I experienced learning throughout the research process and the meaning I made out of the entire process.

Interaction with the Supervisor

The interaction with the supervisor was an eye-opener. I found the advice the supervisor gave to be important in defining my research objectives and streamlining the research. The supervisor provided the knowledge and guidance for carrying out research that was not only important to the current study but also will help me in future endeavours in the field of research. The supervisor helped me identify my research’s shortcomings and was instrumental in providing details and highlighting areas that needed further research or changes. The sessions with my supervisor were informative and motivated me to continue with the research process. Before the research process and meeting my supervisor, I had no idea how to analyse the data collected, but my supervisor introduced me to methods of data analysis that allowed me to process the data collected throughout the research process. The knowledge gained from my interaction with my supervisor shall be useful in my future endeavours in research and related fields. The feedback from the supervisor also ensured that I constantly reviewed my work to achieve the project’s objectives.

Interaction With the Respondents

The interaction with the respondents was limited to the online platform on which the survey questions were administered. The experience of interacting with them was skill-building, especially on the communication front, as I communicated with them to ensure that the survey was successful. Further, interacting with the respondents reaffirmed my belief that human beings participating in research experience similar situations differently and should not be confined to a researcher’s perception of reality. Interacting with the respondents also allowed me to experience their situations through them and better understand the subject of study. The experience made me understand that the study subjects were also humans with feelings and expectations and could be hurt.

The Extent to Which the Research Objectives Were Met

Meeting the research objectives were closely connected to the research design and methodology. Given that the research methodology and design were consistent and appropriately measured what they intended to measure, I believe that the research objectives were met and the research questions were conclusively answered. How workers view reward management and how this impacts their level of motivation was revealed, and the finding was contextualised and situated within Amazon company. Further, the study produced relevant and useful information for the company. The use of a mixed approach allowed me to benefit from the strengths of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. The most reliable secondary sources used in the literature review section of the paper also ensured that previous ideologies on the subject of study were captured.

Employability Skills Gained Throughout the Process

The research process helps me refine and improve my employability skills. Some employability skills I acquired or improved during the research process include communication skills, leadership, reliability, initiative, teamwork, patience, and adaptability. The fact that I had to communicate with the respondents and my supervisor allowed me to improve my written and oral communication skills. My supervisor was very helpful as he gave me advice on improving my communication skills. My supervisor also recommended reading materials and a set of activities that helped improve my communication skills. Clear and concise communication is an important skill in any job. For the research to succeed, I had to take control of the entire process, make decisions and be the leader. As such, I had to step up and be the leader that the respondents relied upon. Further, for the respondents to trust and participate in the research, I had to prove that I was reliable, patient, and a team player. The respondents only participated in the research because they believed that I was trustworthy and ready to work with them. Throughout the research, I had to think proactively about the tasks at hand and change and adapt to new scenarios whenever something changed. I had to adapt and accommodate the diversity in the research population. Going through this also helped improve my self-confidence and discipline. I believe the employability skills I have acquired during the period of the research will make me a valuable employee in any organisation.

Potential Contribution of The Research

I believe that the research produced a comprehensive knowledge of how workers view reward management and how this impacts their motivation level, which will be useful to Amazon and organisations with similar programs. The study has also produced information that teachers and students in the field may use to gain more insight into how workers view reward management and how this impacts their level of motivation. Another potential contribution of the research is that it creates the foundation for future studies in the area. It provides future researchers with the foundation on which they can start their research. At a personal level, the research or study process has endowed me with relevant skills that I can use to contribute positively and build a career in the future. It has sharpened my employability skills and gave me an advantage when it comes to practical skills needed to succeed in the job market. Conducting the project has enabled me to identify my strengths and weaknesses and provided me with the right skills to work on them. The research process has made me more well-rounded; my personality has developed in multiple aspects.

References

Abun, D., n.d. Favoritism in the Workplace and Its Effect on the Organization.

Acharya, A., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., Nigam, A., 2013. Sampling: Why and How of it? Anita S Acharya, Anupam Prakash, Pikee Saxena, Aruna Nigam. Indian Journal of Medical Specilaities. https://doi.org/10.7713/ijms.2013.0032

Alghamdi, F.S., 2015. Another Look at Job and Life Satisfaction among Employees: Evidence from a Developing Country. AJIBM 05, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2015.51002

Alharahsheh, H.H., Pius, A., 2020. A review of key paradigms: Positivism VS interpretivism. Global Academic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 2, 39–43.

Aliyu, M.B., 2017. Efficiency of Boolean search strings for Information retrieval. American Journal of Engineering Research 6, 216–222.

Amoako, G., 2011. Application of Frederick Herzberg's Two-Factor theory in assessing and understanding employee motivation at work: a Ghanaian Perspective. European Journal of Business and ….

Amoatemaa, A.S., Kyeremeh, D.D., 2016. Making Employee Recognition a Tool for Achieving Improved Performance: Implication for Ghanaian Universities. Journal of Education and Practice.

Ana Kurtulus, F., Kruse, D., Blasi, J., n.d. Worker attitudes toward employee ownership, profit sharing and variable pay, in: Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory and Labor-Managed Firms. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 143–168.

Aspers, P., Corte, U., 2019. What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology 42, 139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7

Biau, D.J., Kernéis, S., Porcher, R., n.d. Statistics in Brief: The Importance of Sample Size in the Planning and Interpretation of Medical Research. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466, 2282–2288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0346-9

Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., Walker, K., 2020. Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of research in Nursing 25, 652–661.

Chang, J.-H., Teng, C.-C., 2017. Intrinsic or extrinsic motivations for hospitality employees’ creativity: The moderating role of organization-level regulatory focus. International Journal of Hospitality Management 60, 133–141.

Clabough, J., Turner, T.N., Russell, W.B., Waters, S., 2015. Unpuzzling history with primary sources. IAP.

Connelly, L.M., 2014. Ethical considerations in research studies. Medsurg Nursing 23, 54–56.

Creswell, J.W., 2013. Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., Sheikh, A., 2011. The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology 11, 100. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Davis, P.J., 2015. Implementing an employee career-development strategy: How to build commitment and retain employees. Human Resource Management International Digest 23, 28–32.

Dobbin, F., Kalev, A., 2016. Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review 94, 14.

Dulebohn, J.H., Werling, S.E., 2007. Compensation research past, present, and future. Human Resource Management Review 17, 191–207.

Etikan, I., Musa, S.A., Alkassim, R.S., 2016. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics 5, 1–4.

Eyisi, D., 2016. The usefulness of qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in researching problem-solving ability in science education curriculum. Journal of education and practice 7, 91–100.

Fetters, M.D., Curry, L.A., Creswell, J.W., 2013. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health services research 48, 2134–2156.

Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L., 2017. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge.

Guo, W., Li, T., Wu, N., 2015. Empirical Study on the Effects of Leader’s Verbal Communication Style on Employee’s Job Satisfaction. JHRSS 03, 211–227. https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2015.34027

Hancock, P., 2022. Employee recognition programmes: An immanent critique. Organization 13505084221098244. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084221098244

Hayow, F., 2018. Identity choice of Somali College Students.

Heale, R., Twycross, A., 2015. Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-based nursing 18, 66–67.

Hewett, R., Shantz, A., Mundy, J., Alfes, K., 2018. Attribution theories in human resource management research: A review and research agenda. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 29, 87–126.

Icfai Business School, n.d. Attribution Theory.

Inuwa, M., 2016. Job satisfaction and employee performance: An empirical approach. The Millennium University Journal 1, 90–103.

Koncar, P., Santos, T., Strohmaier, M., Helic, D., 2022. On the application of the Two-Factor Theory to online employer reviews. J. of Data, Inf. and Manag. 4, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42488-021-00061-3

Koo, B., Yu, J., Chua, B.-L., Lee, S., Han, H., 2020. Relationships among emotional and material rewards, job satisfaction, burnout, affective commitment, job performance, and turnover intention in the hotel industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism 21, 371–401.

Kumari, K., Barkat Ali, S., Abbas, J., 2021. Examining the role of motivation and reward in employees’ job performance through mediating effect of job satisfaction: an empirical evidence. International Journal of Organizational Leadership 10, 401–420.

Lăzăroiu, G., 2015. Employee motivation and job performance. Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations 97–102.

Lekić, N., Vapa-Tankosić, J., Rajaković-Mijailović, J., Lekić, S., 2019. An analysis of factors influencing employee job satisfaction in a public sector. E a M: Ekonomie a Management 22, 83–99.

Li, F., Deng, H., Leung, K., Zhao, Y., 2017. Is perceived creativity-reward contingency good for creativity? The role of challenge and threat appraisals. Human Resource Management 56, 693–709.

Liu, Y., Yin, X., Li, S., Zhou, X., Zhu, R., Zhang, F., 2021. The Relationship Between Employee’s Status Perception and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Psychological Path of Work Vitality. Psychol Res Behav Manag 14, 743–757. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S307664

Madhani, Dr.P., 2020. Effective Rewards and Recognition Strategy: Enhancing Employee Engagement, Customer Retention and Company Performance.

Maslow, A.H., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological review 50, 370.

McKim, C.A., 2017. The value of mixed methods research: A mixed methods study. Journal of mixed methods research 11, 202–222.

McNabb, D.E., 2016. Research Methods for Political Science: Quantitative and Qualitative Methods, 2nd ed. Routledge, New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315701141

Meena, S., Girija, T., Visagamoorthi, D., 2019. Influence of Rewards and Recognition on Employees’ Motivation and Job Performance: Path Analysis Approach. Indian Journal of Science and Technology 12, 12.

Mitchell, R.C., Carson, R.T., 2013. Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. Rff press.

Morse, J.M., 2016. Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Routledge.

Ndungu, D.N., 2017. The Effects of Rewards and Recognition on Employee Performance in Public Educational Institutions: A Case of Kenyatta University, Kenya. Global Journal of Management and Business Research 17, 43–68.

Neuendorf, K., 2018. Content analysis and thematic analysis. pp. 211–223. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315517971-21

Noyes, J., Booth, A., Moore, G., Flemming, K., Tunçalp, Ö., Shakibazadeh, E., 2019. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative evidence to inform guidelines on complex interventions: clarifying the purposes, designs and outlining some methods. BMJ Global Health 4. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000893

Osborne, J., Overbay, A., n.d. The Power of Outliers (and Why Researchers Should Always Check for Them). Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 9.

Ozturk, A., Karatepe, O.M., 2019. Frontline hotel employees’ psychological capital, trust in organization, and their effects on nonattendance intentions, absenteeism, and creative performance. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 28, 217–239.

P., B., 2013. A Study on the Impact of Rewards and Recognition on Employee Motivation. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) 4, 1644.

Pearce, S.M., Bangura, A., 2019. The impact of financial and non-financial rewards on employee motivation: Case study NRA Sierra Leone. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.

Phillips, H., Bogdanich, I., Carter, K., Holler, J., Smith, T., Ticehurst, E.H., Wascher, M., 2017. Commentary: Exploring Novel Approaches to Staff Rewards and Recognition. Hosp Pharm 52, 729–731. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018578717736242

Ponto, J., 2015. Understanding and evaluating survey research. Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology 6, 168.

Rai, N., Thapa, B., 2015. A study on purposive sampling method in research. Kathmandu: Kathmandu School of Law 5.

Ryan, J.C., 2023. Equity theory in action: how to attract locals into nursing jobs. Management Decision 61, 1–7.

Ryan, J.C., 2016. Old knowledge for new impacts: Equity theory and workforce nationalization. Journal of Business Research 69, 1587–1592.

Schuurman, B., Eijkman, Q., 2013. Moving terrorism research forward: The crucial role of primary sources. JSTOR.

Shaikh, M.S., Nawar, Y.S., 2018. The impact of employee perception and engagement on firm performance: leadership perspective. The Business & Management Review 10, 138–158.

Sharma, R., Mithas, S., Kankanhalli, A., 2014. Transforming decision-making processes: a research agenda for understanding the impact of business analytics on organisations. European Journal of Information Systems 23, 433–441.

Shaver, K.G., 2016. An introduction to attribution processes. Routledge.

Shepherd, D.A., Williams, T.A., Patzelt, H., 2015. Thinking about entrepreneurial decision making: Review and research agenda. Journal of management 41, 11–46.

Singh, A., n.d. Rewards and Recognition: Make a difference to the talent in your organisation Acknowledgements.

Smith, C., 2014. Employee recognition at work: A study of employee experiences (PhD Thesis). University of York.

Smith, W., n.d. Does Gender Influence Online Survey Participation? A Record-Linkage Analysis of University Faculty Online Survey Response Behavior. Online Submission.

Spilka, B., Shaver, P.R., Kirkpatrick, L.A., 2019. A general attribution theory for the psychology of religion, in: The Psychology of Religion. Routledge, pp. 153–170.

Stone, B., 2022. Amazon unbound: Jeff Bezos and the invention of a global empire. Simon and Schuster.

Studwell, J., 2013. How Asia works: Success and failure in the world’s most dynamic region. Open Road+ Grove/Atlantic.

Taherdoost, H., 2016. Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. How to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research (August 10, 2016).

Tessema, M., Ready, K., Embaye, A., 2014. The Effects of Employee Recognition , Pay , and Benefits on Job Satisfaction : Cross Country Evidence.

Tirta, A.H., Enrika, A., 2020. Understanding the impact of reward and recognition, work life balance, on employee retention with job satisfaction as mediating variable on millennials in Indonesia. Journal of Business and Retail Management Research 14, 88–98.

Vroom, V.H., 1964. Work and motivation.

Watkins, R., Fusch, P., 2022. Employee Monetary Compensation and Employee Job Satisfaction. JSS 10, 321–339. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2022.109021