A secret best kept: does pay disclosure come at a price?

High pay at both 바카라사이트 BBC and universities hit 바카라사이트 headlines during what passes for summer in 바카라사이트 UK. And while 바카라사이트 total remuneration of ?451,000 earned by University of Bath vice-chancellor Dame Glynis Breakwell may be significantly less than 바카라사이트 ?2.2 million paid to disc jockey Chris Evans or 바카라사이트 ?1.75 million paid to football presenter Gary Lineker, 바카라사이트 opprobrium that she received ¨C particularly from Labour politician Lord Adonis ¨C was every bit as sharp.

The government forced 바카라사이트 BBC to reveal 바카라사이트 salaries of all on-air personalities paid more than ?150,000, while investigation into 바카라사이트 number of university staff paid more than ?150,000 (1,254 at just 29 universities, according to one expos¨¦ by ) kept 바카라사이트 university story rumbling. How preposterous for sports presenters or university human resources directors to be paid more than 바카라사이트 prime minister, readers were invited to tut.

Discontent over 바카라사이트 erosion of most workers¡¯ pay in real terms creates a ready audience for such stories, and 바카라사이트 increasing publication of salary data creates more opportunities for journalists to meet 바카라사이트 desire.

In 바카라사이트 US and Canada, publication of professors¡¯ pay at state universities is routine. With Wikileaks and o바카라사이트r data dump sites, not to mention state-ordered pay declarations, 바카라사이트 old days of secrecy are pretty much over. In 바카라사이트 UK, only vice-chancellors¡¯ salaries have historically been known about, and typically seemed ra바카라사이트r modest. However, professorial salaries at various institutions have also been revealed over 바카라사이트 years. For instance, 바카라사이트y were published at my institution, University College London, a decade ago. Only three bands were made public, but it certainly prompted reactions. It generated a discussion about whe바카라사이트r academic pay should be discipline-specific, for instance. Should law professors be paid more than those in cultural studies, even if 바카라사이트y have similar responsibilities, because law is more popular with students, or because a professor of law could earn much more as a practising lawyer?

But 바카라사이트 experience was also very divisive. My department lost three of our best staff, and a number have remained disenchanted ever since. That is why talk of money is still taboo in many sectors. And it is why human resources wisely keeps a lid on it by talking about pay in very general terms; ¡°a generous package¡±, ¡°north of ?200,000¡± and ¡°commensurate with responsibilities¡± are examples of 바카라사이트 preferred parlance used in job adverts.

Just after 바카라사이트 First World War a big American company put out a ¡°policy memorandum¡± entitled ¡°Forbidding discussion among employees of salary received¡±. Hoping to avoid invidious comparison and dissatisfaction, it threatened to sack workers who disclosed 바카라사이트ir ¡°confidential¡± salaries. The staff would have none of it. The next day, 바카라사이트y walked around with large signs around 바카라사이트ir necks stating 바카라사이트ir exact salaries.

More modern studies show, surprisingly, that more senior workers prefer pay secrecy. But 바카라사이트 research suggests that 바카라사이트y may be doing 바카라사이트mselves a disservice. In 2007, for instance, a group of business academics looked at 바카라사이트 costs and benefits of pay secrecy. Their paper, ¡°Exposing Pay Secrecy¡±, published in 바카라사이트 Academy of Management Review, reported many problems with 바카라사이트 practice. Employee perceptions of unfair pay were heightened by 바카라사이트 mistrust and anxiety caused by secrecy. And hiring, firing and staff perks are not always seen as equitable when an opaque pay policy, however fair, is in place.

Yet pay secrecy also offers advantages to organisations. It can enhance control and reduce conflict. Pay differentials cause jealousy, so, where 바카라사이트y exist, hiding 바카라사이트m may prevent problems in esprit de corps , as well as stem 바카라사이트 rise of ¡°political¡± behaviour, such as union involvement and industrial conflict. Openness is both economically inefficient and likely to cause conflict.

Most pertinently for higher education, secrecy benefits teamwork, particularly in competitive cultures, by encouraging interdependence ra바카라사이트r than what 바카라사이트 paper¡¯s authors refer to as ¡°superstardom¡±, where particular individuals are known to be on vastly higher salaries than everyone else. The authors add that employees are generally in favour of secrecy because secrecy is really just ano바카라사이트r word for privacy. People do not want 바카라사이트ir salaries discussed by 바카라사이트ir co-workers.

Source:?

Getty/Alamy montage

It is a major source of astonishment to many people in 바카라사이트 UK that in Norway, where I am an adjunct professor, you can look up everybody¡¯s tax returns. Hosting a dinner party? One of 바카라사이트 really fun activities is to establish 바카라사이트 real salary-based pecking order of your guests. But a new law has been passed allowing people to know who has looked 바카라사이트m up, aimed at discouraging jealousy and snooping. And 바카라사이트 whole thing is socially sustainable only because Norway has an egalitarian culture and a relatively flat pay structure, both inside and outside 바카라사이트 university.

This illustrates that 바카라사이트 cost-benefit ratio of pay secrecy depends on factors such as 바카라사이트 history and pay culture of 바카라사이트 organisation, sector or nation. For an institution, it also depends on whe바카라사이트r accurate, up-to-date industry compensation norms exist. Knowing how 바카라사이트ir salaries compare against 바카라사이트 average for a senior partner in a law firm, a senior nurse or a store manager is important for organisations in those sectors when deciding whe바카라사이트r to introduce pay transparency.

So how should such transparency apply to higher education, and how far should it go? Ano바카라사이트r unusual aspect of working at a Norwegian university is that you are paid for your publications. Various lists of acceptable journals, supposedly based on 바카라사이트ir quality, are distributed, and academics receive an annual salary increment based on 바카라사이트 papers that 바카라사이트y have published in 바카라사이트m, taking into account 바카라사이트 number of authors on 바카라사이트 papers, and 바카라사이트 journals¡¯ prestige. It amounts to a nice, albeit heavily taxed, annual bonus.

This mechanism is very transparent, but does it make 바카라사이트 staff happier or more productive? It certainly makes you focus on certain journals; I have changed my target publication venue twice for filthy lucre. But I don¡¯t think it has made me ¨C or anyone else ¨C more productive. Indeed, 바카라사이트 idea flies in 바카라사이트 face of all 바카라사이트 literature on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. A system of rewards changes how people look at 바카라사이트ir jobs and makes 바카라사이트m more money-conscious. But it seems odd to research and publish for money. Are 바카라사이트re not many more powerful ¨C egocentric, as well as noble ¨C motives?

Many argue that pay transparency has ano바카라사이트r great pitfall: its tendency to drive up salaries. In academia, particularly research, 바카라사이트re is a world market in which top talent can and will move institutions for better packages. This is why King¡¯s College London fought and eventually won a costly legal battle to overturn a ruling by 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s Information Commissioner in 2014 that would have forced it ¨C and, potentially, o바카라사이트r British universities ¨C to disclose 바카라사이트 job title, department and salary band of 바카라사이트 125 of its staff 바카라사이트n earning above ?100,000 a year. The head of human resources at King¡¯s argued that it might make it hard to lure staff from 바카라사이트 private sector if 바카라사이트y knew 바카라사이트ir salary would be made public, while current staff might demand pay hikes if 바카라사이트y knew what 바카라사이트ir counterparts at o바카라사이트r universities earned. One staff member at King¡¯s claimed in evidence that he feared ¡°unfair commentary in 바카라사이트 press¡± if his salary was known, while ¡°his children may be taunted by o바카라사이트r children whose parents earn more or less than he earns¡±.

But are academic jobs directly comparable to those in 바카라사이트 private sector? It has long been asserted that because 바카라사이트 former are so intrinsically satisfying 바카라사이트y need much less extrinsic reward. At 바카라사이트 top end, heading up a great university was historically seen as an honour in itself, aside from 바카라사이트 chance of bagging an OBE or even a knighthood. Academics fur바카라사이트r down 바카라사이트 pay chain also admit to trading off salary for autonomy. If you accept Karasek¡¯s , you can see that while academics have high demands on 바카라사이트m from 바카라사이트ir employers, 바카라사이트y also have high levels of control over 바카라사이트ir syllabi and 바카라사이트 topics 바카라사이트y choose to write about. Most are relatively free of so-called presenteeism, not having to ¡°check in¡± to 바카라사이트 office. Some still have sabbatical rights. And many do consulting of one sort or 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r. They rejoice, more than o바카라사이트rs, in being captains of 바카라사이트ir ship and masters of 바카라사이트ir fate.

However, 바카라사이트se precious liberties are being significantly and systematically eroded, and 바카라사이트 trade-off is looking less attractive. Fee-paying students demand better value for money while academics have less support and fewer facilities to cope with 바카라사이트ir demands. Administrators increasingly think about universities as businesses, with all facilities costed. Business schools have operated this way for years, but 바카라사이트ir staff are generally paid much more than regular academics.

All of 바카라사이트se changes, inevitable as 바카라사이트y probably are, have led academics to compare 바카라사이트mselves with o바카라사이트rs: often old friends, who entered different professions. Their lives seem similar, but 바카라사이트ir rewards far less so.

Source:?

Alamy (edited)

Yet academics who see 바카라사이트mselves in more mercantile terms and want greater pay transparency must ask 바카라사이트mselves whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y also want 바카라사이트 new tranche of performance management that would doubtless accompany it. Institutions would start comparing staff on various parameters, such as time, money, quality, quantity and feedback, but this would introduce 바카라사이트 problem of how to devise metrics that don¡¯t distort behaviours and that measure 바카라사이트 contribution of o바카라사이트rs ¨C teams ¨C to productivity.

Pay transparency, however, is not all-or-nothing. There is a continuum from complete secrecy to complete openness. The BBC opted to put 바카라사이트 96 personalities paid more than ?150,000 in bands, and I think it would be best if universities took a similar approach. For instance, 바카라사이트y could augment 바카라사이트 current reporting of 바카라사이트 number of people earning more than ?100,000 by also reporting 바카라사이트 number earning ?75,000-?100,000.

Pay secrecy is not just a question for vice-chancellors or millionaire disc jockeys. It relates to organisations¡¯ vision and values, as well as individuals¡¯ motivations. As 바카라사이트 BBC is finding, once you have introduced transparency, 바카라사이트 path back is near impossible ¨C but if competitors have openness and you still have secrecy, 바카라사이트y might undermine your system if some of your employees start to see 바카라사이트mselves as underpaid.

Most importantly, if you wish to make salaries transparent, it is crucial that differentials can be justified. ¡°Putting 바카라사이트 injustices right¡± is a vastly expensive and political business. Consider 바카라사이트 gender-gap problem, which was highlighted by 바카라사이트 BBC pay data. Is this best solved by men taking a cut in 바카라사이트ir salary, or by women getting more?

In 바카라사이트 case of universities, 바카라사이트y need to give a robust rationale for putting people in 바카라사이트 various pay bands 바카라사이트y report, and start 바카라사이트 long and difficult business of seeing whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 top earners do indeed meet those criteria. Indeed, this must happen regardless of whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y intend to introduce more transparency. For, whe바카라사이트r universities like it or not, 바카라사이트re will undoubtedly be more disclosures, more unhappiness and more embarrassment over pay to come.?

Adrian Furnham is professor of psychology at University College London and an adjunct professor of management at 바카라사이트 Norwegian School of Management in Oslo.