初始技术是不等式的组成部分。在这种情况下，收入最高的员工获得的绩效奖励百分比越低，其美元价值就越高。这与底层员工获得更高的百分比奖相比是显而易见的(Gerhart & Fang, 2014)。然而，高层员工会从心理上认为这是一种惩罚。第二种方法建议设定极具挑战性的绩效目标，以确保提高标准，而这些目标是无法实现的。这将挑战管理者的技能，并作为不平等的替代例子发挥作用。此外，与底层员工相比，顶层员工的年龄往往更大。这种技术会导致年龄歧视，因为较少的长期服务的老年劳动力能够成功地达到更困难的目标(Ismail等，2016)。高/低支付性能:基本工资比例适用的绩效工资将会影响员工的努力获得奖的性能。
当绩效奖励比例较低时，员工通常不愿意为实现目标付出额外的努力(Gupta & Shaw, 2014)。员工努力工作达到目标时更高比例大约10每cent.Relationships断裂通过奖励:奖励个人或团体性质的既能触发在员工中竞争力。当员工为了有限的绩效工资而互相竞争时，他们开始将同事视为自己成功的障碍(Van der Linden et al.， 2015)。在这种情况下，基于绩效的薪酬方式会使员工相互对立，从而破坏团队合作。它不仅会随着团队工作的解散而对生产力产生负面影响，还会引发各种各样的问题，如质量问题、决策问题、同一工作岗位的工资水平不平等问题。
The initial technique is component of inequality. This is where the performance award of less percentage for the workers earning top band salary will be higher in terms of dollars. This is evident in comparison with the higher percentage award for the workers at bottom band (Gerhart & Fang, 2014). However, it will be viewed punitive by the employee at the top band psychologically.The secondary technique suggests setting highly challenging objectives of performance to ensure bar is raised and the objectives are unattainable. This will challenge the skills of the manager and function as alternate example of inequality. Moreover, major amount of employees at the top band are often older in age as compared with bottom band. This technique results in age discrimination as less number of long serving older workforce will be successfully able to reach the tougher objectives (Ismail et al., 2016). High/low pay for performance：The basic salary percentage applicable as the performance based pay will have an effect on the efforts of the workforce in obtaining the award for performance.
It is considered that employees are usually disinterest to make additional effort in attaining their goal when the performance award percentage is low (Gupta & Shaw, 2014). Employees work harder to reach the objective when the percentage is higher around 10 per cent.Relationships rupturing through rewards：Awards of individual or group nature can both trigger competitiveness among the workforce. When the workers compete each other for the limited performance based pay amount, they start to view colleagues as their own success’s obstacle (Van der Linden et al., 2015). In this context, the approach of performance based pay can turn employees against one another that will undermine the teamwork. It can have not only negative impact on the productivity as the team work dissolves but it will also trigger various issues with quality, decision making and unequal salary level among the same work position.