IntroductionEmployee performance can be one of the reasons why organization is successful because there are different types of demands that employees make them work. Another reason why performance could be effective and efficient for the organization is to understand why people work as this will motivate them to perform well. (Kovach, 1987). Employee performance can be affected by external and joint forces. External forces that can affect employee performance can be changes in technology, work environment, competition, and so on. On the other hand, internal forces are the level of motivation, ability, ability and knowledge. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayTherefore, it is important to understand the external and internal forces that can lead to employee performance. Organizational justice theory (Greenberg, 1987) focuses on issues related to employees' perceptions of their organization's behaviors, treating employees fairly within the organization so that actions and decisions influence attitudes and behaviors of employees at work (McShane, Olekalans, Newman & Travaglione, 2016 ). Furthermore, it derives from equity theory, which suggests that individuals make fairness judgments based on the amount they give (input) versus the amount they receive in return (output). Adam's equity theory evaluates effort (input) and reward (output) and also justifies it as a relationship between the evaluation and the employee's perception towards his job and the employer. According to Adam's equity inputs, these are efforts, commitment, ability, adaptability, determination and trust in superiors. On the other hand, outcomes include recognition, reputation and responsibility. Employee work relationship outcome situations are evaluated by Adam's theory. Between input and output equity, equity itself depends on the comparison of one's input/output ration with the reference ratios, therefore, between input and output people will have 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 it can also turn into an unhappy environment, so this could be the reward/effort relationship. “A theme in the motivation and creativity literatures 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 on extrinsic motivation, which, importantly, has been seen as lower in quality than intrinsic motivation in terms of 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) The DECI attributes Answer Individuals must have extrinsic motivators to increase the impression in people that their behavior externally provides fairer pay and meaningful work. The purpose of this essay will be to present fair pay and meaningful work are ineffective and why pay-for-performance system is the best approach towards employees. Share pay alludes to the decency of the trade association with each worker and thecircumstance of the work performed. A matching standard works when we trust that everyone in the group should achieve similar results (McShane, Olekalns, Newman, & Travaglione, 2016). Demoralizing the lower paid representatives from bending and stimulating the more generously paid worker to exaggerate their abilities and position, which would be a demotivator to represent the two groups (Rai, 2008). Employees often talk to each other about an authoritative payment system (Gerharte Fang, 2015). To ensure sufficient inspiration, management must ensure reasonableness and impartiality in compensation levels among workers in occupations, offices and equivalent employment value within the company. Within the foundation, formal salary ranges where representatives with comparable jobs and experience are brought together using a similar scale can help maintain internal value. The strategy can stimulate or demotivate the worker based on the vision of the importance of the work. Studies have shown that people will be less likely to resist new job opportunities if they trust others in their experience and pay scale to be offered higher packages for a similar position. It is therefore essential that companies pay specialists at the right level and demonstrate to them that the compensation is paid within the association. There are limits to the viability of value-based pay as a driving variable. There are identity members within the association who are more willing to be less happy with their installments. Outgoing workers have a more careful attitude towards their pay levels (Kirmanen and Salanova, 2010). Likewise there are representatives with high neuroticism, reliability and transparency considered satisfied with their compensation levels. Consequently, this implies that no flawless compensation methodology would convince each use. Pay for Performance Programs “Social environment refers to the interaction between people and compliance with numerous social and social laws, rules, and norms created by people to regulate and control people's behavior” (Chandan, 2008, p. 44). Poor communication between people or weak social network in an organization will affect employee behavior due to belonging needs that cannot be satisfied. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, belongingness is the lack of needs of people and must be satisfied so that employees feel safe and fundamentally comfortable (Chandan, 2008). Ex gratia installments, commissions and rewards are essential to inspire representatives to put more effort into their efforts. However, some scholars have argued that performance compensation also gives impetus to less-skilled personnel to complete some tasks paid based on performance-related pay. The focus on execution is indecisive. As the representative motivational impact overwhelms the association, efficiency increases (Brown, Hyatt, & Benson, 2010). On the other hand, if the impact of the choice has a high level, the singular return decays. In such cases, efforts should go towards creating a compensation structure that allows for the misuse of the motivational capacity of financial motivators without authorizing wasteful exercises within the association (Wilton, 2010). When setting workers' compensation, most associations often use benchmarking information within the company to set compensation and wages in light of the reasonable incentive in the market (Muchinsky and Culbertson, 2016). For execution compensation models, workers.