One of the responsibilities of a manager is to motivate their employees to increase their performance. However, I strongly disagree that basing their salaries on their rates of production and sales would be the most effective method.
The performance in many cases cannot simply be quantified in terms of sales or production. A teacher’s job, for example, is to teach classes, assess homework, and provide students with feedback, none of which involves producing or selling any goods. In this case, it is the performance of her students and their levels of satisfaction with aspects of her performance such as rapport or punctuality that decide how successful he has been.
Furthermore, the performance of many workers is greatly affected by external factors beyond their control. The state of the economy, unexpected political developments, and extreme weather conditions can all have significant impacts on how much a worker can sell or produce. A hurricane, for example, can easily devastate a farm and all its produce without its workers being responsible for any of the damages or the ensuing drop in production rates. Basing wages on sales or production rates would actually demotivate workers in such cases.
Some may argue that it is difficult to assess anything other than a worker’s output, making any other form of appraisal less effective. However, managers these days have tools such as questionnaires and Customer Relations Management platforms that allow them to form a relatively clear picture of a worker’s overall performance.
In conclusion, I think deciding how much an employee should earn based solely on their sales or production figures would be both impossible and unfair in most, if not all, cases. Instead, employers should look at a more diverse set of performance indicators, including customer satisfaction and punctuality.