StrategicCompensationManagement BMSP13/230001 & BMSP13/230002
- Subject Code :
BMSP13-230001-BMSP13-230002
Schoolof BusinessManagement
2023/24
BM1986
StrategicCompensationManagement BMSP13/230001 & BMSP13/230002 ICA2(50%)
ProjectGuide
Date of issue: Tuesday, 09 January 2023 SubmissionDue:Sunday,03March2024,2359
- Assignment Outline
Thisisanindividualassignmentwhichconstitutes50%oftheoverallassessmentforthis module. ICA2 aims to test learners ability in applying the concepts of strategic compensationmanagementtoamultinationalorganization.Theassignmentwillrequire learners to apply concepts from all topics in a research report:
- Pay Model & Strategy
- Internal Alignment
- External Competitiveness
- Employee Contribution
- Benefits & International Pay Systems
- Managing Compensation
- Learning Outcomes
Uponcompletionoftheproject,learnerwillbeableto:-
- Design an externally competitive pay
- Recommend appropriate employee compensation &
- Design appropriate pay for performance
- Requirements
With reference to the analysis of the chosen organization completed in ICA1, ICA 2 assignmentrequiresyoutoreviewthechosencompanysexternalcompetitiveness.You willproceedtoprovidefurtheranalysisandrecommendationstothemanagementofthe chosen organization.
Attach ICA1 Part I Introduction as an appendix to this report for the assessorsconvenient reference.
Thereportshouldcoverall3partsinorder:
PartI ExternalCompetitiveness
- Identify and explain the top three (3) factors that shape the organizations external competitiveness.
- For the chosen job family, research and recommend three (3) most relevant competitors to benchmark against. Provide a brief analysis of the selected competitors and explain your rationale for the selection.
- Recommend the ideal market percentile level that the chosen job family should be benchmarked against the chosen competitors in partExplain your rationale using concepts of pay level strategy (lead, lag or match).
- Design the pay structure for the selected job family with reference to online data, and present it usingTable1.Evaluatethedesignofyourpaystructure with reference to relevant concepts covered in this topic.
- Identify an individual profile on LinkedIn that would be a good fit for any role in the job family. Suggest with reason, the recommended compa-ratio for the identified profile.
PartII EmployeeContribution
- Select any one (1) of the job role within the job family and develop a set of key performance indicators (KPI) for the role, including the associated performance rating scale.
- Design a pay-for-performance bonus and increment plan, stating the corresponding bonus and increment that will be awarded based on the employees KPIEvaluate your pay-for-performance program with reference to research and market data.
PartIIIBenefits&InternationalPaySystems
- Recommend the ideal type of benefit program for the chosen organization that will best attract and retain the right talents. Support your recommendations with research and market data.
- Select a similar organization operating in another country apart from Singapore. State your research and detail the differences in compensation policies and practices adopted by the foreign organization.
Table1:
|
Grade no |
JobTitle |
Minimum ($) |
Mid-Point($) |
Maximum($) |
Max/Min Ratio |
Reason(s) |
|
|
||||||
|
|
- Submission
Areportofnotmorethan2,000wordsexcludingappendicesmustbesubmittedbefore the deadline. The report should consist of the following:
- Cover Page:Include a cover page with learners name, admission number and report word count.
- Table ofContents:Detailthepartsofthe
- Report Body:Containtheassessmentrequirements,PartI,IIandIII
- Appendices:Introduction of the organization, as well as supplementary information such as screenshots, websites, and references of supporting
SubmissionthroughTurnitininPOLITE Mall
Turnitin is a cloud-based solution with capabilities in originality checking using their Originality Check tool. Originality Check allows your instructor to monitor assignment
submissions and identify potential cases of plagiarism by automatically comparing submissions to an online database of original content. It is the responsibility of the learners to ensure that the matching text highlighted in the Turnitin similarity report is properly referenced.
- Please read the following guide on how to submit your report in POLITEMall:https://help.turnitin.com/feedback-studio/d2l/student/submitting-a-paper/submitting-a-paper.htm
- Learner scan also view the following video to learn how to submit your report in POLITEMall:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY0ogyh-IhQ
Latesubmissionandpenalties
Apenaltyof5%ofthetotalassessmentmarksperdayoflatesubmissionwillbe imposed. Any late submission after 5 days will be awarded 0 mark.
Plagiarism
Inthisassessment,youmustnotusegenerativeartificialintelligence(AI)to generate any materials or content in relation to the assessment task.
Plagiarism is serious matter. Plagiarism is the act of taking and using the whole or any part of ideas, words or works of other people and passing it off as ones own work, without acknowledgement of the original source. The act of plagiarism is an offence under NYP Academic Integrity Policy:https://www.nyp.edu.sg/current-students/academic-matters/nyp-academic-integrity.html. Any act of plagiarism may be construed as academic dishonesty. A candidate who, after due disciplinary process, is found to have committed an act that contravenesacademicintegrityin anyassessment ofamodulewouldbeliablefordisciplinaryactionunderNYPAcademicIntegrityPolicy.
It is also important not to share your or your teams work with other learner(s) or team(s).ALLpartiesinvolvedinanyactofplagiarism(includinglearner(s)orteam(s) who haveshared their work with others)wouldbe liable fordisciplinary actionunder NYP Academic Integrity Policy. If any learner had asked you to share your work with him/her, it is important to turn down his/her request and report the incident immediately to your module tutor to safeguard your integrity.
All content from online or other primary sources should be properly referenced (even if you are paraphrasing). Learners can usehttps://www.scribbr.com/apa-citation-generator/orotheronlinecitationgeneratortoproperlystatethesourceofthereference (websites, journal articles, books and reports) in the American Psychological Association (APA) format. The APA format is a writing style and format for academic documents such as scholarly journal articles and books. When in doubt, the rule is to acknowledge the source.
A Turnitin Similarity Report generated provides detailed information about the matches foundbetweenalearner'ssubmittedworkandexistingsources.Learnerscanusethe
report to review their submissions for originality and identify the specific areas of their submitted work where proper referencing are required.Failing to do so may lead to plagiarism being reported in Turnitin.
WhenanassignmentissubmittedusingTurnitin,theTurnitinSimilarityReportisnormally available within 15-30 minutes. However, a slight delay may occur between the upload andtheavailabilityoftheSimilarityReportduringperiodsofhighusage.Hence,learners areencouragedtosubmittheirreportatleastonedaybeforethesubmissiondeadlineso that they have sufficient time to make any necessary amendment and resubmission before the submission deadline expires.
- Assessment
Thisprojectcarriesatotalof100marksandconstitutes50%oftheoverallgradeforthe module. The breakdown of marks is as follows: -
|
Component |
Marks |
|
ExternalCompetitiveness |
40 |
|
EmployeeContribution |
30 |
|
Benefits&InternationalPaySystems |
30 |
|
TotalReport |
100 |
Detailedscoringrubricsforthewrittenreportareattachedintheappendix.
Appendix-ScoringRubricofWrittenReport
|
Evaluation Criteria |
A |
B |
C |
D |
F |
|
Part I ExternalCompetitiveness(Total:40marks)
a)Factors (5 marks) |
4-5marks |
3.5marks |
3 marks |
2.5marks |
2andbelowmarks |
|
Factorsidentified were strong and clearlyexplained. |
Factorsidentifiedwere logicalwithacceptable explanation. |
Factors have some relevance in shapingthe externalcompetitiveness of the organization, but not clearly explained. |
Factors have weak relevanceinshaping the external competitiveness of the organization. |
Poor / Irrelevant factors were considered or proposedtoshape the external competitivenessof the organization. |
|
|
b) CompetitorBenchmarking(10 marks) |
8-10marks |
7-7.5marks |
6-6.5marks |
5-5.5marks |
4.5andbelowmarks |
|
Competitors selected havestrongrelevance along with clear and concise explanation and justification presented. Research data presented, clear andconcisewithclear linkage and strong reference. |
Competitors selected havestrongrelevance, and clear explanation and adequate justification of the selection. Research data presented, clear and fairly concise with adequate linkage and clear reference. |
Sufficientandadequate selection and explanation of the relevant competitor. Sufficientresearchdata presented with adequate reference to the data. |
Insufficient / weak selection and explanation of the relevant competitors. Inadequate research data presented, and inadequatereference against the data. |
Poor selection and incomplete / inadequate explanation of the relevant competitors. Researchdatapoorly presented, poor reference or no linkage against the data. |
|
|
c)Paylevelstrategy(10 marks) |
8-10marks |
7-7.5marks |
6-6.5marks |
5-5.5marks |
4.5andbelowmarks |
|
Clear and concise explanation and selection of the market percentile. Strongjustification, clear and concise explanation to support the pay strategy. |
Clear explanation and selectionofthemarket percentile. Clear and adequate justification, and clear explanation to support the pay strategy. |
Adequateexplanation and selection of the market percentile. Adequate justification and sufficient explanationtosupport the pay strategy with minorinconsistencies. |
Weak explanationand selection of the market percentile. Weakjustificationand insufficient explanation tosupport the pay strategy. |
Poor / Incomplete explanation and poor selection of themarket percentile. Poor / Inadequatejustification and insufficient / incompleteexplanation to support the pay strategy. |
|
d)Paystructure (10 marks) |
8-10marks |
7-7.5marks |
6-6.5marks |
5-5.5marks |
4.5andbelowmarks |
|
Well setup salary structure with clear illustration of salary range,supportedwith strong research data, clearly presented,and well referenced against the research data. Strengths and weaknesses well presented with clear illustration and explanationinrelation to the current salary structure, supported with data that are clearandconcise. |
Salary structure and salaryrangewellsetup and supported with adequate research data. Clear illustration and explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of the currentsalarystructure with strong justification and data to support. |
Salary structure and salary range fairly well setup and supported withadequateresearch data. Sound review of the strengths and weaknesses of current salary structure with fairly clear explanation and justification to support. |
Inadequate research conductedinsupportof the construction of the salary structure and salary range. Explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of the currentsalarystructures were inadequate, and weak linkage to the research data and poorly presented. |
Poorly designed pay structure and salary range with irrelevant research data presented.Incomplete explanation of the strengths and weakness with poor / nolinktotheresearch data presented in relation to the current salary structure. |
|
|
e) Profile (5marks) |
4-5marks |
3.5marks |
3 marks |
2.5marks |
2andbelowmarks |
|
Profileisidentified with strong relevance, with strong rationale provided. |
Profileisidentifiedwith relevance, and with rationale provided. |
Profileisidentifiedwith some relevance, with weak rationale provided. |
Profile is identified with somerelevance,butno rationale provided. |
Failed to identify profile, or profile is irrelevanttochosen job family. |
|
Part II Employee Contribution(30 marks) |
2430marks |
2123marks |
1820marks |
1517marks |
014marks |
|
KPIs of the selected positionpresentedina clear and concise manner for clear understanding of the deliverables. Performance measurements are clearlypresented.Well- designed bonus and increment matrix with clear and concise explanation of the performance scale. Clearly defined reward strategy which is suitablefortheselected position to enhance performance, and supported with strong researchdataandclear references. |
KPIslistedareadequate tomeasureperformance of the selected position, with clear rating scale provided. Well-designed bonus and increment matrix with clear explanation of the performance scale/ Reward strategy is suitablefortheselected position and supported with research data and references. |
KPIs listed are able to measure most parts of the performance of the selected position, with rating scale provided. Recommended bonus and increment matrix are supported with adequateresearchdata and suitable for the selected position. |
KPIsareinadequateto measure the performance of the selected position, with vague rating scale provided. Recommended bonus and increment matrix arenotexactlypractical nor supported with research data. |
KPIs are poorly selected that do not have link to the selectedposition,with no / poor rating scale provided. Poorly designed bonus and increment matrix with vague explanation that has no / poor link to the selected position. |
|
Part III Benefits & Internationalpaysystems (30marks) |
2430marks |
2123marks |
1820marks |
1517marks |
014marks |
|
Clear, specific, and unique benefits recommended that are ofquality and feasible, strong linkage to the talent attraction and retention strategy. Well performed research with clear and strong linkage to support the selectionofthebenefits recommendation.
Comprehensive informationprovidedon the foreign companys compensation policies andpracticeswithclear references provided. |
Clear and specific benefits recommended that are ofquality and feasible, well linked to thetalentattractionand retention strategy. Sufficientresearchdata with strong linkage to support theselectionof the benefits recommendation.
Adequate information providedontheforeign companys compensation policies and practices with adequate references provided. |
Generic set of benefits recommended with someleveloffeasibility. Adequate researchdata with good level of linkage to support the selectionofthebenefits recommendation.
Some information providedontheforeign companys compensation policies and practices with some references provided. |
Unclear and irrelevant benefitsrecommended with weak feasibility. Inadequate research data with inadequate linkage to support the selectionofthebenefits recommendation.
Few information providedontheforeign companys compensation policies and practices with no / few references provided. |
Poorly selected benefits with weak feasibility.Incomplete research data with poor / no link to support the selection of the benefits recommendation.
Weak / poorly researched data on foreign company compensationpolicies and practices with no references provided. |
