Conference Agenda

In recent decades, the issue of fairness in compensation management has emerged as a central theme in organizational research and practice, reflecting its profound influence on employee attitudes, behaviors, and organizational outcomes. As organizations operate in increasingly competitive and globalized environments, ensuring perceived fairness in pay structures has become a strategic necessity rather than a discretionary consideration.

From a theoretical perspective, fairness in compensation can be analyzed through multiple frameworks. Theories such as Equity theory, Relative deprivation theory and Social comparison theory all underscore the deep psychological mechanisms through which fairness perceptions in compensation influence workplace dynamics. In addition, Organizational justice theory elaborates this into four key dimensions: distributive, procedural, interactional, and informational justice. These theories and dimensions have intermingled, evolved and promoted with each other throughout the long history of the development of compensation management, jointly constituting the richness of the concept of fairness in the compensation system.

With the development of this system, empirical research consistently shows that fairness perceptions have significant consequences for organizational effectiveness. For example, perceptions of fairness enhance motivation, loyalty, and performance. To capture the multifaceted nature of fairness perceptions in nowadays, this study employs a dedicated Likert-scale survey covering aspects such as gender fairness, cultural fairness, and external market comparisons. The findings will help illuminate how fairness perceptions are constructed, the correlation strength among the fairness factors, and how they translate into employee outcomes，and based on the investigation results transition to the challenges faced by the phenomenon of fairness in compensation management such as global cultural diversity and external economic pressures, which complicate the maintenance of perceived fairness.

Addressing these emerging challenges, this study also explores internal and external strategies for enhancing fairness. Internally, mechanisms such as promoting pay transparency and addressing gender equity are vital. Externally, organizations must balance global standardization with cultural sensitivity to maintain fairness across diverse workforces. Technological innovations, particularly AI-driven compensation systems, offer opportunities for objectivity and efficiency but simultaneously introduce risks of bias and opacity. Thus, designing fair compensation practices in a dynamic, multicultural, and technology-enhanced environment remains a pressing concern.

In conclusion, by systematically investigating the conceptual foundations, employee outcomes, and strategic solutions associated with fairness perceptions in compensation management, this study aims to advance both theoretical understanding and practical applications. It seeks to bridge the existing gaps by integrating diverse theoretical lenses, validating propositions through empirical data, and offering actionable insights for organizations striving to build equitable and sustainable compensation systems in an evolving global context.

1. Problem statement and purpose

In advancing the modernization of China's national governance system and capacity, talent is the most critical determinant. As the main body exercising public power and performing official duties on behalf of the state, the promotion mechanism for public officials directly impacts governance efficiency and national development. However, one-sided tendencies in traditional promotion models—such as "sole reliance on votes, scores, GDP, or age"—have become increasingly prominent. These not only restrict the scientific and comprehensive evaluation of talent but also weaken the innovative vitality of the public service team. In response, the Chinese government has proposed a new promotion concept of "four considerations and four no-sole-reliances" based on national conditions and problem orientation: "consider votes without exclusive focus， consider scores without exclusive focus, consider GDP without exclusive focus, and consider age without exclusive focus." This concept aims to break through inherent promotion limitations, identify capable talent accurately through scientific and dialectical criteria, stimulate team enthusiasm, and lay a solid talent foundation for national governance modernization.

2. Methodology

This paper adopts a trinity research framework of "problem-practice-experience". First, it uses a problem-oriented approach to analyze the drawbacks of traditional promotion mechanisms, clarifying the practical significance of the "four considerations and four no-sole-reliances" concept. Then, through case studies combined with measures like organizational review and performance assessment, it expounds the implementation paths in improving democratic quality and optimizing promotion criteria. Finally, it refines core experiences via summarization, forming a complete research system from theoretical proposal to practical verification and experience sublimation.

3. Findings

The study shows that the "four considerations and four no-sole-reliances" concept has achieved multi-dimensional breakthroughs in practice. By integrating organizational review with democratic recommendation, it breaks the "sole reliance on votes". Guided by actual performance, it tackles "sole reliance on scores" via multi-angle assessment. With scientific evaluation and accountability, it reshapes performance concepts. Through institutional optimization, it forms an echelon of senior, middle-aged and young staff, boosting team vitality. This concept systematically solves traditional promotion issues, offering a replicable model for national governance and enhancing talent promotion science and team building quality.

4. Proposals

Based on practical experience, the following optimization strategies are proposed: First, adhere to the correct orientation to ensure that promotion criteria are deeply aligned with national strategies and governance objectives. Second, uphold the principle of seeking truth from facts, formulate dynamic promotion criteria based on actual needs, and avoid dogmatism. Third, broaden channels for public participation, enhance the credibility of results by improving the transparency and democracy of promotion. Fourth, improve the institutional system, strengthen institutional constraints and norms, and promote the long-term and standardized development of promotion work.

5. References

Liang Xiang. (2020). "Four No-Sole-Reliances" and "Four No-Demands" in Professional Title Evaluation. Enterprise Management, 2020(3), 12-15.

Liu Shoujun. (2012). The "Four Considerations and Four No-Sole-Reliances" in Cadre Selection and Employment. Friends of Party Members and Cadres, (1), 16-17.

Lu Chiwen. (2005). An Economic Perspective on the "Four No-Sole-Reliances" in Leadership Talent Selection. Zi Guang Ge (Purple Light Pavilion), 6.