Sentence examples for reward allocation from inspiring English sources

Kleinberg et al. [27] described three scenarios modelled as Coalitional Games (introduced in Osborne [32]) and the reward allocation exchange of private information is done according to the core and Shapley values.

Folger and Greenberg [ 20] categorized organizational justice as distributive justice (the perceived fairness of the reward allocation) and procedural justice (the perceived fairness of the decision-making process applied by the organization).

Reward allocation was determined as follows: There were three types of reward allocation (i.e., block types): (1) 20 % for the left-hand response and 80%% for the right-hand response leading to reward, (2) 80%% for the left-hand response and 20%% for the right-hand response leading to reward, and (3) 50%% reward for the left-hand response and for the right-hand response.

That is, behavioral results show that individuals have strong preferences to equity in both reward allocation (e.g., monetary win) and liability distribution (e.g., monetary loss) such that they alter others' payoff toward more equal distribution, at their personal costs [Dawes et al., 2007].

Persons tend to have higher empathy for ingroup members [45] and favor them in reward allocations [46] and in esteem[47].

Results support the importance of rewards allocation (distributive justice) and information given on this allocation (informational justice) to promote workers' well-being.

One of the many lessons learned (having to be relearned time and time again throughout history) is that active discussions with regard to risk, reward and allocation of investments are imperative.

This study is an attempt to observe the impact of organizational factors (reward, resources allocation, autonomy & empowerment and supportive structure) and leader's entrepreneurial orientation on individual's entrepreneurial orientation, and ultimately role of individual's entrepreneurial orientation on project success.

Bland and Ruffin [ 14] and Brocato and Mavis [ 15] identified accessible resources, appropriate rewards, time allocation, promotion and tenure as stimulators for research and scholarly productivity.

Despite the different forms of organizing, they all address four universal problems: task division, task allocation, reward distribution and information flow.

The solutions of these four organizing problems (task division, task allocation, reward distribution and information flow) cannot be separated (Puranam et al., 2014).