IntroductionEmployee performance can be one of the reasons why the organization is successful because employees have different types of needs to motivate them to work. Another reason why performance could be effective for the organization is to understand the reason why people are working, as this will motivate them to perform well. (Kovach, 1987). Employee performance can be affected by external and inter-force forces. External forces that can influence employee performance can be technological changes, work environment, competition, etc. On the other hand, internal strengths are motivation level, abilities, skills and knowledge. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay Therefore, it is important to understand the external forces as well as the internal forces that can drive employee performance. Organizational justice theory (Greenberg, 1987) focuses on employees' perceptions of their organization's behaviors, treating employees fairly within the organization so that actions and decisions influence their own attitudes and behaviors at work (McShane, Olekalans, Newman, & Travaglione, 2016). ).Furthermore, it derives from equity theory, which suggests that individuals make judgments about fairness based on the amount they give (input) versus the amount they receive in return (output ). Adam's Equity Theory evaluates effort (inputs) and reward (outcomes) and also justifies the relationship between the evaluation and the employee's perception of his job and the employer. According to Adam's equity inputs, it is effort, commitment, skills, adaptability, determination and trust in superiors. On the other hand, outcomes include recognition, reputation and accountability. The situations of ratios results on the work of employees are evaluated by Adam's theory. Between input and output equity, equity itself depends on comparing one's own input/output ratio with benchmark ratios. Therefore, between inputs and outputs, people will need to feel that there is a fair balance (Adams, 1963). Equity theory can explain why people can be happy and motivated, but in terms of work environments this can also turn into an unhappy environment, so this could be a reward/effort ratio. “A recurring theme in studies of motivation and creativity is not only that pay for performance was often detrimental to intrinsic motivation, but also that even when pay for performance (PFP) produced a positive effect on motivation , it was about extrinsic motivation, which, more importantly, was considered of lower quality compared to intrinsic motivation in terms of its sustainability or ability to generate key positive outcomes such as creativity and well-being. » (Gerhart & Fong 2015) According to Deci (1971), the increase in motivation indicates that (a) when money was used as an external reward, intrinsic motivation tended to decrease; whereas (b) DECI Attributes Answer Individuals must have extrinsic motivations to make people feel that their behavior externally provides fairer pay and meaningful work. The purpose of this essay will be to present equity in compensation and meaningful work and why The pay-for-performance system constitutes abest approach towards employees. Pay equity alludes to the decency of the professional association with each worker and the circumstances of the work they performed. A matching standard works when we are confident that all participants in the gathering should achieve similar outcomes (McShane, Olekalns, Newman, & Travaglione, 2016). Demoralize lower paid representatives by preventing them from becoming attached and encourage higher paid workers to exaggerate their own abilities and position, which would be demotivating to represent both groups (Rai, 2008). Workers regularly talk to each other about the authoritative payout structure (Gerhartet Fang, 2015). To ensure sufficient inspiration, the administration must ensure reasonableness and impartiality of remuneration levels among workers occupying equivalent professions, offices and employment value within the company. Within the foundation, formal pay scales, in which representatives with comparable jobs and experts are brought together using a similar scale, can help maintain internal value. The strategy can either arouse or demotivate the worker by relying on the vision of the importance of the work. Studies have shown that individuals will have less incentive to apply for new job offers if they believe that others with their experience and salary range are being offered higher offers for a similar position. It is therefore essential that companies pay specialists at the appropriate levels and demonstrate to them that the remuneration is provided within the association. There are limits to the viability of value-based compensation as a driving variable. There are identity people within the association who are more willing to be less satisfied with their payments. Exiting workers have a greater attitude towards their remuneration levels (Kirmanen and Salanova, 2010). There are also representatives with high neuroticism, trustworthiness, and transparency who are considered satisfied with their compensation levels. Therefore, this means that no impeccable earning method would persuade every user. Pay-for-performance systems “The social environment is linked to the interaction between people and follows many social and societal laws, rules and norms created by people to regulate and control their behavior” (Chandan, 2008, p. 44). Poor communication between people or a weak social network in an organization will affect employee behavior because belongingness needs cannot be met. According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, relatedness is people's lack of needs and must be met for employees to feel safe. and fundamental comfortable (Chandan, 2008). Ex-gratia payments, commissions, and rewards are key to incentivizing reps to put more effort into their efforts. Be that as it may, some researchers have argued that performance pay also incentivizes less skilled personnel to perform some paid exercises based on performance pay. The focus on execution ends up being indecisive. When representative motivational impact overwhelms the association, effectiveness increases (Brown, Hyatt, & Benson, 2010). Again, if the impact of the decision is high, the singular return decreases. In such cases, efforts should be aimed at developing a compensation structure that permits misuse of employees' motivational capacity...