Rewards in Bureaucracy and Politics

  • Igor Benati
  • Mario Coccia
Living reference work entry



The term “reward” comes from Middle English meed, mede (“reward, meed, recompense”). Rewards are a system to compensate performance of subjects and incentivize their motivation within organizations. Rewards system can include tangible elements (e.g., remuneration and other benefits) and intangible elements (e.g., reputation, job responsibility).


The concept of rewards is a main management topic developed from behavioral research in psychology. These studies analyze how people react to rewards and what motivates them to work in organizations. The concept of rewards is associated with the concept of motivation, which indicates the forces that energize, direct, and sustain behavior of individuals (Perry and Porter 1982). In general, rewards systems are based on processes, policies, and strategies to motivate subjects to achieve strategic goals and enhance the productivity of organizations (Armstrong 2007; Reif 1975). Put...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Aberbach JD, Putnam RD, Rockman BA (eds) (1981) Bureaucrats and politicians in Western democracies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong M (2007) A handbook of employee reward management and practice, 2nd edn. Kogan Page, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  3. Benati I, Coccia M (2017) General trends and causes of high compensation of government managers in the OECD countries. Int J Public Adm.
  4. Bowman JS (2010) The success of failure: the paradox of performance pay. Rev Public Pers Adm 30(1):70–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brans M, Peters BG (eds) (2012) Rewards for high public office in Europe and North America. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Coccia M (2001) Satisfaction, work involvement and R&D performance. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management 1(2/3/4):268–282.
  7. Crewson PE (1997) Public-service motivation: building empirical evidence of incidence and effect. J Public Adm Res Theory 7(4):499–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hood C, Peters BG (1994) Rewards at the top: a comparative study of high public office. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Hood C, Peters BG, Lee G (eds) (2002) Reward for high public office: Asian and Pacific rim States. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Judge TA, Piccolo RP, Podsakoff NP, Shaw JC, Rich BL (2010) The relationship between pay and job satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the literature. J Vocat Behav 77(2):157–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lepper M, Greene D (1978) The hidden costs of reward: new perspectives on the psychology of human motivation. Lawrence Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  12. O’Reilly C, Chatman J, Caldwell D (1991) People and organizational culture: a profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Acad Manag J 34(3):487–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Perry JL, Porter LW (1982) Factors affecting the context for motivation in public organizations. Acad Manag Rev 7(1):89–98Google Scholar
  14. Perry JL, Hondeghem A, Wise LR (2010) Revisiting the motivational bases of public service: twenty years of research and an agenda for the future. Public Adm Rev 70(5):681–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rainey HG (1982) Reward preferences among public and private managers: in search of the service ethic. Am Rev Public Adm 16(4):288–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Reif WE (1975) Intrinsic versus extrinsic rewards: resolving the controversy. Hum Resour Manag 14(2):2–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. United States Office of Government Ethics Preventing conflicts of interest in the Executive branch 2018. Accessed Jan 2018
  18. Wright BE (2007) Public service and motivation: does mission matter? Public Adm Rev 67(1):54–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CNR – National Research Council of ItalyTorinoItaly
  2. 2.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA