It has been a debate whether employers should pay their employees according to how well they perform, or equally splitting the salary to each worker. Despite there being rationales in favour of both sides, it is my belief that reaching a balance between regarding their efficiencies and being fair to each worker is the optimal solution.
Proponents to the first view explain that this is because employees with better performance often bring more profit to the company. Since salary is a straightforward and quantitative approach to reward staffs, well-performance staffs have the right to earn a higher salary than average workers. According to research from the University of Hong Kong, professors whose students have scored higher GPA are 80% more likely to earn a increase in salary within 12 months, in order to encourage higher quality of education.
On the other hand, opponents to this viewpoint emphasise the fairness and respect to every crew in the company. Although each employees have different capability on the same piece of work, they are believed to have paid a lot of effort onto projects and meeting criteria. Paying some with significantly higher amounts than the others would seem biased and creates conflicts about the inequality. To illustrate, the MDT corporation has been reported paying several employees five times greater than their partners, resulting in physical conflicts between them.
As seen, the best method is neither paying well-performed staffs more, nor treating everyone perfectly equal. Achieving a balance between both sides can make sure every employee is considered while appreciating their particular hard work at a rational extent, so that employees are more willing to co-operate with one another.
In conclusion, while some leaders prefer rewarding employees base on their profit brought, opponents tend to respect every worker’s effort. However, I would recommend incorporating both ideas to reach an equilibrium.