The Impact of Additional Pay on Risk-Crisis Management, Work Integration, and Job Satisfaction in Education: A Comparative Analysis with a Focus on Greece

Often in the form of extra pay, financial incentives have been extensively applied as a strategic tool to increase teacher engagement, lower turnover, and create a good school atmosphere. Designed to honor teachers' efforts, raise job satisfaction, and promote professional integration, extra compensation in educational environments consists in bonuses, performance-based incentives, and allowances [1,2]. Still up for contention, though, is how successful these incentives are depending on cultural, economic, and institutional setting [3,4]. 

The usage of extra compensation in education is mostly driven by its ability to help to solve issues related to risk-crisis management in the sector. Financial uncertainty, human resource issues, and safety concerns that could interfere with the seamless running of educational institutions are among the several operational hazards that educational institutions run [5]. Studies indicate that financial incentives might improve teacher stability and motivation, hence lowering turnover rates and guaranteeing continuity in instruction [6-8]. Furthermore, linking financial incentives to results in risk management—such as better student performance or greater school safety—helps to inspire proactive crisis prevention [1,9]. Notwithstanding these advantages, some research contend that financial incentives could compromise natural motivations, especially in fields where teachers are driven by a sense of purpose and dedication to student success [10]. To maximize risk control and teacher motivation, then, good pay schemes must precisely balance intrinsic and extrinsic incentives. 

Apart from risk control, further compensation is rather important for encouraging job satisfaction and work integration. Teachers' engagement, teamwork, and general performance are much influenced by job integration—that is, their sense of connection to their workplace [11]. Studies show that financial incentives can help to foster justice and equity, therefore improving the cohesiveness and inclusion in the workplace [12,13]. Moreover, related to team performance or group projects, extra compensation promotes cooperation and a friendly professional atmosphere [8,14]. Poorly planned financial incentives, however, might cause rivalry instead of collaboration, therefore compromising the sense of community and integration inside schools [15]. 

Another important component influenced by extra pay is job satisfaction, which consists of several factors including working circumstances, professional growth chances, and financial pay [16,17]. Studies repeatedly show that financial incentives lower financial stress and give instructors real recognition, therefore improving their job satisfaction [18]. In high-stress learning situations, where teachers may have heavy responsibilities and difficulties, this is especially crucial [19]. Herzberg's two-factor theory supports this viewpoint by contending that while not always raising job satisfaction, financial incentives can satisfy teachers' basic financial demands and therefore prevent unhappiness [20]. Still, job satisfaction is complex and financial incentives should supplement natural motivators such professional development, supportive connections, and good school environments [19]. 

Contextual elements including cultural values, economic situation, and professional standards affect the strategic tool of supplementary pay's success in education. Performance-based compensation schemes have been extensively embraced in the United States and the United Kingdom but have produced mixed results with issues regarding justice, competitiveness, and stress [3,21]. Unlike performance-based incentives, Finnish teachers get extra compensation based on seniority and additional duties. This strategy promotes professional autonomy and teamwork, therefore supporting high degrees of job satisfaction and commitment [4]. These different results draw attention to the need of including cultural and institutional elements into financial incentive design and execution. 

Given its economic difficulties and public sector pay cuts, which have greatly impacted teacher motivation and job satisfaction, the Greek education system offers a special setting for analyzing the impact of extra pay due [22]. Additional pay is seen in Greece as a possible instrument to reduce financial strain and raise teacher well-being. Still, its success depends on more general economic limitations and ideas of justice [23]. Greek teachers are driven by internal elements including professional development and a feeling of community, even when financial benefits can increase motivation and job satisfaction [24]. Therefore, compensation schemes should address systematic inequities and supplement natural motivators in Greece to maximize the effect of extra pay. 

This paper attempts to offer a thorough investigation of how extra compensation affects job satisfaction, work integration, and risk-crisis management in educational environments. Emphasizing the special possibilities and difficulties inside the Greek educational system, it provides a comparative study of worldwide research. This study aims to highlight the need of strategically using financial incentives in education by synthesizing results from several cultural settings, thereby stressing the need of culturally and systemically customized approaches.

This study follows a qualitative, bibliographic research methodology aimed at analyzing the impact of additional pay on risk-crisis management, work integration, and job satisfaction in the educational sector. A comparative perspective is adopted to contrast international best practices with the Greek context, particularly in light of the financial crisis and its repercussions on public sector compensation. 

The research design relies on systematic qualitative content analysis. This method enables the identification of recurring themes, conceptual patterns, and critical insights across the selected literature. A rigorous search strategy was applied to academic databases including Google Scholar, Scopus, ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), which provided access to interdisciplinary studies combining educational theory, psychology, and economics. Furthermore, national sources such as the National Documentation Centre of Greece (EKT), institutional repositories of Greek universities, and open-access Greek journals like Dialogues and Education, Lifelong Learning, Research and Technological Development were used to retrieve context-specific literature relevant to the Greek educational landscape. 

Keyword searches were conducted using both English and Greek terms, incorporating Boolean operators to refine results. English search terms included combinations such as “financial incentives in education,” “additional pay and teacher satisfaction,” “performance-based pay and risk management,” “education and work integration,” and “teacher retention and compensation.” Greek keywords such as “financial incentives in education”, “additional pay for teachers” and “teachers’ job satisfaction” were also used to capture national sources, ensuring the bilingual nature of the review was maintained. 

To ensure academic rigor, clear inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The inclusion criteria consisted of peer-reviewed articles, empirical studies, theoretical contributions, and policy reports published between 2000 and 2025. Only studies that focused on teacher pay, motivation, organizational climate, job satisfaction, or education-related risk management were considered. Particular emphasis was given to works offering comparative or Greek-specific insights. Sources that were not peer-reviewed, lacked full-text access, or did not directly address the topic of teacher compensation were excluded. Foundational studies such as those by Herzberg et al., [20], Vroom [25] and Deci and Ryan [26] were retained despite their earlier publication dates due to their continued theoretical relevance. 

While this methodology ensures a comprehensive and comparative perspective, certain limitations must be acknowledged. The reliance on secondary data means that no original empirical research was conducted, such as interviews or surveys. Finally, given the evolving nature of educational reforms in the post-pandemic era, some recent developments in teacher compensation policies may not yet be fully captured in the literature.

Impact of Additional Pay on Risk-Crisis Management in Schools 

In educational institutions, risk management refers to the strategic processes employed to reduce potential disruptions such as operational difficulties, financial instability, and human resource challenges [5,27]. These factors threaten institutional continuity, teacher performance, and student learning outcomes. One of the most pressing risk-related issues is high teacher turnover, which can lead to staff shortages, disrupted instructional flow, and increased pressure on remaining staff—ultimately diminishing the quality of education delivered [7,28]. 

Performance-based financial incentives have emerged as strategic tools to address these issues by enhancing teacher motivation, professional stability, and organizational commitment, thereby reducing turnover and bolstering institutional resilience [2,6]. Empirical evidence suggests that such incentives not only elevate job satisfaction but also alleviate financial stress and uncertainty, making educators more resilient during institutional or national crises [1,18,29]. 

Grounded in Expectancy Theory [25], financial reward systems are more effective when teachers perceive a transparent and direct link between their efforts and the rewards they receive. Teachers who are recognized for contributions to risk mitigation, such as improved student performance or proactive safety efforts, are more likely to remain engaged and committed to institutional goals [22,30,31]. Additionally, targeted pay schemes contribute to greater staff retention, improved pedagogical quality, and stronger institutional culture [32,33]. 

Nevertheless, over-reliance on extrinsic motivators—particularly when implemented in isolation—can backfire. Research underscores that an exclusive focus on monetary rewards may weaken intrinsic motivation, which is rooted in educators' sense of purpose, professional identity, and commitment to student success [10,34,]. Such systems may also inadvertently foster competition rather than collaboration among colleagues, leading to burnout and dissatisfaction, especially in resource-constrained contexts like Greece [35,36]. 

Therefore, financial incentives should not be seen as a stand-alone solution. Instead, they must be part of a balanced approach that integrates professional autonomy, development opportunities, and a supportive work culture. When thoughtfully designed, additional compensation can serve as a buffer against crisis-related pressures, enhancing teacher well-being and institutional stability without compromising intrinsic values [37,38].

Additional Pay and Work Integration 

Work integration—that is, employees' sense of connection to their workplace and sense of belonging—helps to determine engagement, teamwork, and general efficacy [11]. Work integration greatly influences instructors' interactions with students, teamwork with colleagues, and general job effectiveness in educational environments [39]. By encouraging a feeling of equity and fairness, supporting workplace inclusion, and giving instructors real appreciation of their efforts, additional remuneration can improve work integration [13,40]. Teachers who believe they are compensated properly for their efforts feel more appreciated and valuable, which strengthens their allegiance to the school community [41]. In educational settings where resources could be few and teachers sometimes feel disrespected, this is especially crucial. 

Financial incentives connected to team performance or cooperative projects can also inspire instructors to work together, therefore enhancing professional connections and community cohesiveness [8,14,42]. In schools, where group effort and teamwork are important for tackling difficult problems and reaching instructional objectives, this cooperative approach to professional integration is absolutely vital [43]. Furthermore, financial incentives can enhance good group dynamics by honoring teachers' cooperative efforts, therefore strengthening the coherent and supportive school atmosphere [44]. 

Poorly crafted financial incentives, especially if rewards are based on individual rather than team success, may unintentionally encourage competitiveness rather than collaboration, though [15,45]. This competitive dynamic can erode the feeling of community and divide teachers, therefore compromising workplace integration. Schools have to strike a balance between team and personal incentives to avoid these difficulties and encourage both personal excellence and group projects. Schools can improve job integration and preserve a pleasant and inclusive workplace culture by carefully planning reward systems that fit with cooperative objectives [46]. 

The importance of work integration becomes particularly evident in conditions of increased pressure and high demands, such as those experienced in educational institutions. Studies have shown that teachers who feel integrated in their workplace have lower levels of burnout and greater resilience to challenges [47]. Providing additional rewards linked to job-related contributions and teamwork can enhance this sense of integration as teachers feel that their work is recognized and fairly rewarded [37]. The sense that pay reflects collective effort rather than just individual performance enhances staff cohesion, thus improving the overall work climate. 

In addition, financial rewards based on team performance and collaborative initiatives can create an environment that promotes learning and knowledge sharing among teachers [48]. Research has shown that reward programmes that focus on collective performance, such as those implemented in some Scandinavian countries, help to create a culture of mutual support among teachers and improve the quality of teaching [49]. In such an environment, teachers are more likely to collaborate to develop innovative teaching approaches, provide mutual support and foster a sense of professional community [50]. 

However, inappropriate management of additional pay can have the opposite effect, causing division among teachers [51]. Studies show that when financial incentives are given solely on the basis of individual performance, without consideration of collaboration, they can lead to competition between colleagues and reduce the sense of community [52,53]. An over-emphasis on individual performance can lead to isolation of teachers and create pressurised working conditions that ultimately weaken their professional commitment. 

In order to maintain a positive and inclusive work culture, supplementary remuneration programmes need to be carefully designed, taking into account not only financial compensation, but also professional recognition and development opportunities. Research suggests that the most effective reward systems are those that combine financial and non-financial incentives, such as access to training courses, career development opportunities and recognition from management [54]. Providing additional rewards in conjunction with such initiatives creates a work environment where teachers feel both financially and professionally valued, thereby increasing their work integration and overall commitment [55].

Additional Pay and Job Satisfaction 

Teachers' well-being and performance are much influenced by job satisfaction, which consists of several components including working circumstances, connections with colleagues, chances for professional development, and financial pay [16]. Job satisfaction greatly affects teacher motivation, retention, and general performance in educational environments [56]. Particularly in high-stress workplaces where teachers must deal with demanding tasks and difficult obstacles, additional remuneration gives teachers real appreciation for their hard work and devotion, therefore boosting their motivation and lowering their discontent [18,57]. 

By attending to teachers' financial requirements and thereby lowering their economic stress, financial incentives also help to promote job happiness. Herzberg's two-factor theory holds that while not always raising job satisfaction, financial incentives can satisfy teachers' basic requirements and therefore prevent discontent [20]. In this regard, extra pay serves as a hygienic element that helps to lower financial stress and avoid discontent resulting from supposed wage disparities. In educational institutions where teachers could feel underpaid or undervaluated, this is especially pertinent. 

Financial incentives by themselves, meanwhile, are not enough to maintain long-term job satisfaction since other important elements including student performance, professional development, supportive connections, and a good school climate also contribute greatly [19]. Studies reveal that instructors' influence on students' learning and development as well as chances for professional development and peer-to--peer interaction drive them quite passionately [58]. Thus, extra compensation should be included into a more general plan that targets these natural motivators, so guaranteeing a whole approach to improve teacher job satisfaction and well-being. 

Teachers' job satisfaction is not only related to their individual well-being, but also to the quality of teaching and student outcomes [59]. Research has shown that teachers who are satisfied with their work show higher levels of engagement, innovation, and effectiveness in teaching [60,61]. Providing additional rewards can act as an important factor in enhancing this satisfaction, as it confirms that teachers' work is appropriately recognized and rewarded. Furthermore, increases in salaries have been linked to increased professional autonomy and satisfaction, as they reduce the need to seek second jobs or financial alternatives that can distract teachers from their core tasks [62]. 

Another important element is the interaction between financial and non-financial incentives. Although financial rewards have a positive effect, an exclusive focus on them may lead to a decrease in intrinsic motivation, as supported by self-determination theory [26]. Research shows that when teachers feel that their compensation is solely dependent on quantitative performance criteria, stress and competition can result, weakening the collective work culture [63]. In contrast, compensation programs that combine financial rewards with professional development opportunities, such as subsidized seminars or access to educational resources, have been shown to be more effective in long-term teacher retention [31]. 

In addition, additional rewards play a critical role in reducing job stress and burnout, which are two of the main factors in teachers leaving the profession. According to Skaalvik and Skaalvik [47], burnout is most pronounced when teachers feel undervalued and inadequately compensated for their job demands. In this context, financial rewards are not only a way of enhancing satisfaction, but also a strategy to strengthen teachers' resilience to the pressures of the profession. Providing additional rewards based on objective and transparent criteria has been found to reduce uncertainty and enhance a sense of fairness among teachers, which is critical for maintaining job satisfaction [64,65]. 

Finally, the relationship between additional pay and job satisfaction differs depending on educational context and socioeconomic conditions. In countries where teachers' salaries are low compared to other occupational sectors, additional pay plays a key role in retaining staff and reducing the tendency to leave the profession [66]. Conversely, in systems where teachers are already well paid, non-financial incentives, such as support from management, professional development opportunities and participation in school policy-making, may be more important for overall job satisfaction [33,67]. Therefore, a balanced incentive system, tailored to the needs of teachers and schools, is essential to create a healthy and productive work environment.

Comparative Analysis 

Research on extra pay in education reflects somewhat various cultural, economic, and institutional settings depending on nation. Performance-based incentives like merit pay have demonstrated mixed effects in the United States, with questions about fairness, more stress, and unexpected consequences including less teacher collaboration [21]. While loss aversion bonuses have shown promise for raising student performance, they can create ethical questions and stress [68]. 

The Performance Related Pay (PRP) scheme has had only mixed results in the United Kingdom. Rising competitiveness and perceived unfairness caused teachers to be unhappy, which compromised cooperation and the positive school environment [3]. 

Financial incentives have clearly drawn teachers to rural and underprivileged locations in Australia, hence improving job satisfaction and educational equity [69]. But their success relies on their interaction with support networks and professional growth, which emphasizes the need of all-encompassing incentive systems.

Unlike performance-based approaches, greater pay in Finland is related to seniority and extra responsibility, therefore encouraging professional autonomy and teamwork [4]. Emphasizing intrinsic motivation and community-oriented behaviors, this strategy helps to lead to great degrees of job satisfaction and commitment.

Given its economic difficulties and public sector pay cuts, Greece offers a special setting for examining extra compensation that greatly influences teacher motivation and job satisfaction [22]. Additional remuneration is considered in this context as a possible strategy to reduce budgetary constraints and improve teacher well-being. Still, its efficacy relies on more general economic conditions and ideas of fairness [23]. Greek teachers mostly drive by professional development, community support, and student success; financial incentives play a complimentary role. 

This is strongly echoed by Grammatiko [70], whose study among primary school teachers in Athens revealed that while educators reported satisfaction with their core teaching roles, they also expressed considerable dissatisfaction with working conditions, such as lack of evaluation transparency, limited training opportunities, poor infrastructure, and insufficient educational materials. The study identified key determinants of teacher satisfaction as collegial relations, leadership style, professional growth, and the physical school environment—suggesting that financial incentives must be integrated with structural improvements to be truly effective. 

Greece has little research on how additional compensation affects risk management. Studies indicate, however, that financial incentives can improve resilience but have to be used fairly to prevent systematic inequality [24]. Compensation schemes in Greece should complement intrinsic motivators, encourage equity, and solve structural issues to improve teacher motivation and work satisfaction given the economic restrictions and resource limits. 

Spyriadou and Koutouzis [36] further underscore this point in their qualitative research during the post-crisis austerity period, which involved interviews with teachers and school administrators across Greece. Their findings illustrate how the severe salary reductions imposed by the memoranda eroded professional dignity and demotivated educators. Teachers expressed concern not only about income loss, but also about broader working conditions, future prospects, and interpersonal dynamics in schools. This highlights the need for any incentive schemes to be fair, sustainable, and aligned with teachers’ qualifications and long-term professional trajectories.

The international literature reveals considerable variation in the impact of additional pay, depending on educational policies, economic stability and cultural perceptions of teaching as a profession. In countries such as Denmark and Sweden, where the teaching profession is characterized by high social esteem and good basic salaries, financial incentives play a smaller role in teacher retention, while policies that enhance professional development and autonomy have been shown to be more effective [38]. In these countries, the quality of education is improved through systems of professional development and continuing education, rather than through monetary rewards. 

In contrast, in countries where teachers' wages are low or unstable, additional rewards have a much greater impact on job satisfaction and work engagement. For example, in Latin American countries such as Chile and Mexico, governments have implemented financial incentive programs to improve teacher performance, but the results have been mixed. Some studies show that performance-related pay has boosted student performance in low-income areas [71], while others highlight that such measures can create greater job insecurity and exacerbate educational inequalities [72]. 

Another important differentiation concerns the relationship between financial incentives and teacher collaboration. While in the US and the UK, pay schemes based on individual performance have often led to a reduction in teamwork due to competition [73], in Asian countries such as Singapore and South Korea, financial incentives have been embedded in collective models of acceptance and professional development. In Singapore, for example, the education system offers additional rewards through the Enhanced Performance Management System, which combines financial rewards with professional development and peer review opportunities, thereby reducing competition and enhancing collaboration [74]. 

Also notable is the case of Canada, where the financial incentive strategy has focused primarily on retaining teachers in hard-to-reach areas, particularly in Indigenous communities and remote rural areas. Studies have shown that such incentives can have a positive impact if combined with supportive programmes such as housing, educational development and local community integration policies [33]. This highlights that the success of additional rewards depends on broader educational and social policy. 

Comparing these international findings with the Greek reality, it becomes clear that the effectiveness of financial incentives in education depends on many factors, such as the existing pay system, the culture of cooperation, professional development opportunities and the general economic situation. In Greece, where cuts in public sector salaries have significantly affected teacher satisfaction, the implementation of financial incentives can make a positive contribution, provided that they are designed in a transparent and fair way, without creating competition and inequalities. 

The contributions of Grammatiko [70] and Spyriadou & Koutouzis [36] confirm this multidimensional reality: while pay is essential, teachers’ professional satisfaction in Greece is inextricably tied to infrastructure quality, administrative support, opportunities for development, and a stable socio-political context. Thus, for any incentive to be impactful, it must be embedded within a broader framework that restores professional respect and addresses longstanding structural challenges.

Comparative research on extra pay in educational environments reveals a complicated and subtle relationship among financial incentives and teacher motivation, work satisfaction, and risk management. Affected by systematic elements like economic situations, cultural values, and professional standards, the efficacy of increased compensation differs greatly depending on educational and cultural setting [21,4]. The main conclusions of worldwide research are synthesized in this paper together with contextual variations and consequences for policy and practice. 

In nations using performance-based models, such the United States and the United Kingdom, more compensation has had conflicting effects. In some situations merit pay programs have been successful in improving student achievement; yet, they have also generated questions about fairness, added stress, and unintended consequences including less cooperation among instructors [3,21]. The focus on personal achievement has driven rivalry instead of cooperation, therefore weakening job happiness and workplace integration. Particularly in demanding settings where outside events significantly affect student outcomes, teachers voiced questions regarding the fairness of tying remuneration to student performance [68]. These results imply that even while performance-based incentives can boost motivation, they have to be properly crafted to guarantee equity, fairness, and a positive school environment. 

By contrast, educational systems stressing professional autonomy and cooperative practices—like Finland—show better work satisfaction and commitment among teachers [4]. In Finland, extra remuneration is connected more with seniority and extra responsibility than with performance results, so encouraging a professional trust and cooperation. This strategy recognizes teachers' knowledge and contributions to the school community, therefore encouraging job satisfaction and commitment by matching with natural inclinations. Strong professional ethics and a dedication to student well-being drive Finnish teachers more than financial rewards. These results underline the need of matching pay systems with professional standards and cultural values in order to improve motivation and job satisfaction. 

Financial incentives have clearly drawn teachers to rural and underprivileged locations in Australia, hence improving educational equity and teacher involvement [69]. Nevertheless, the degree of success of these incentives depends on their interaction with support networks and professional growth, so stressing the need of a whole compensation strategy. In this regard, extra compensation functions as a strategic instrument to help teachers' professional development and well-being while so addressing educational inequalities. According to the Australian experience, supportive systems addressing teachers' various demands paired with financial incentives show the best effectiveness. 

Given its economic difficulties and public sector pay cuts, Greece offers a special setting for examining extra compensation that greatly influences teacher motivation and job satisfaction [22]. Additional pay is seen in Greece as a possible instrument to reduce financial strains and raise teacher well-being. But systematic inequality, limited resources, and cultural ideas of fairness all influence its efficacy [23]. Greek teachers are mostly driven by internal elements including professional development, community support, and student performance; financial incentives play a complimentary role. Studies indicate that financial incentives can improve resilience and risk management but must be used fairly to prevent systematic inequality [24]. These results highlight the necessity of specially designed compensation schemes for Greece both culturally and administratively. 

The need of matching financial incentives with intrinsic motivators, professional standards, and cultural values is a major theme showing out from the comparison study. When financial incentives complement natural motivations—such as professional development, student success, and a feeling of community—they are most powerful. This corresponds with expectation theory, which holds that employees who see a clear connection between their efforts and benefits are most motivated [25]. Herzberg's two-factor theory also underlines how important intrinsic motivators are to increase long-term job satisfaction even if financial incentives help to prevent discontent [20]. 

The analysis of additional pay reveals that there is no single approach that is effective in all education systems. Rather, differences in compensation policies reflect differences in social structures, economic capabilities and professional values in each country. For example, in the Nordic countries, where the emphasis is on cooperation and social justice, teachers' base pay is high, while additional pay serves as an additional incentive that enhances commitment and professional development [38]. In contrast, in countries such as the United States, where the education system is characterized by greater differentiation between public and private schools, performance-based incentives have more mixed effectiveness due to a higher emphasis on competitiveness and educational inequalities [75]. 

An important factor that determines the success of additional pay is how it is linked to internal and external sources of incentives. Deci and Ryan's [26] Self-Determination Theory points out that maintaining job satisfaction requires a balance between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. When financial incentives are implemented in a way that enhances teachers' autonomy, sense of purpose, and relationships with students and colleagues, they can have positive outcomes. However, when they become a tool of strict supervision or competition, they can reduce a sense of personal accomplishment and increase job stress [34]. 

The experience of countries such as Australia and Canada shows that providing additional pay is most effective when integrated into a system that includes additional support for teachers, such as professional development programs, access to teaching resources, and stronger links with local communities. For example, the incentive policy in Australia, which aims to attract teachers to remote areas, includes not only financial rewards but also opportunities to access training programs, improve working conditions and enhance social support [76]. This combined model allows for greater job satisfaction and reduces the chances of burnout. 

In contrast, countries that rely solely on financial rewards without accompanying measures have often faced unforeseen negative consequences. In England, for example, the PRP programme has been associated with increased stress among teachers, as well as reduced collaboration between school units, leading to higher staff turnover and reduced trust in administrators [77]. These results suggest that the successful implementation of additional pay requires careful planning to avoid over-emphasis on individual performance at the expense of collegiality. 

In the Greek reality, the influence of additional pay must be considered in light of financial constraints, the existing culture in public schools and long-standing issues regarding teacher pay satisfaction. Although additional pay could improve overall teacher satisfaction, its effectiveness depends on whether it is accompanied by improved working conditions, professional development opportunities, and policies that ensure fairness in resource allocation [23]. Greek teachers, according to existing studies, attach great importance to professional autonomy, stability and recognition by the school community, which implies that financial incentives should be integrated into a broader strategic framework rather than operating as an isolated measure to enhance productivity. 

Finally, an issue that emerges in the debate is the need for transparency and meritocracy in the implementation of additional remuneration. Research has shown that when financial rewards are given in a way that is not perceived as fair by employees, it can create controversy and undermine trust in management mechanisms [78]. Therefore, in any education system that wishes to use financial incentives as a means of enhancing teacher satisfaction, it is necessary to adopt allocation criteria based on transparency, objectivity and recognition of collective efforts. 

The results also underline the need of justice and fairness for applying financial incentives. Teachers voiced worries about the seeming fairness of remuneration schemes in all the nations under research, especially in performance-based models. Compensation systems have to guarantee openness, consistency, and fairness in reward distribution if we are to solve these issues. In Greece, the focus on justice is especially important considering systematic disparities and financial restrictions. Through addressing these contextual elements, educational managers can improve the efficacy of financial incentives while so encouraging work satisfaction, teacher motivation, and risk management.

In educational environments, this paper offers a thorough investigation of how extra compensation affects job satisfaction, work integration, and risk-crisis management. The comparative studies draw attention to important contextual variations, thereby stressing the importance of customizing compensation both functionally and culturally. Financial incentives have shown promise for boosting motivation in nations using performance-based models [21,68], but they have also generated questions about justice, competitiveness, and stress [3,63]. On the other hand, systems emphasizing professional autonomy and cooperative practices—like Finland—demonstrate greater work satisfaction and commitment [4], thus underscoring the need for intrinsic motivators and collaborative cultures. 

Extra compensation can improve teacher well-being and help alleviate economic difficulties in Greece [22]. However, structural inequality, limited resources, and cultural concepts of fairness continue to temper its effectiveness [23]. As research by Grammatiko [70] and Spyriadou & Koutouzis [36] shows, Greek teachers’ satisfaction is influenced as much by school climate, infrastructure, and administrative support as by salary, highlighting the need for integrated approaches. 

Greek compensation systems must complement intrinsic motivators, advance equity, and address structural problems to optimize the impact of financial incentives [17,24,79]. This calls for a comprehensive strategy that combines professional development opportunities, financial rewards, supportive work environments, and transparent, meritocratic reward systems [26,37]. 

This paper contributes to the literature by offering a cross-cultural analysis of the role of additional pay in education and by emphasizing the contextual factors that affect its impact on teacher motivation and job satisfaction. The findings suggest that financial incentives are most effective when aligned with intrinsic motivation, cultural values, and professional standards [20,25,34]. 

Educational leaders must design pay systems that reinforce rather than replace intrinsic motivators, ensuring fairness, transparency, and support. Future research should explore innovative incentive systems that address the complex realities of education, including financial constraints, cultural expectations, and teachers' professional identities. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess the sustained effects of financial incentives on retention, integration, and instructional quality [31,33]. Furthermore, qualitative studies on teacher perceptions of fairness, equity, and motivation would provide deeper insights into pay dynamics [78]. 

Even though additional pay is a powerful tool to enhance teacher engagement and performance, it is not a panacea. To maximize its effect, educational policymakers should implement culturally sensitive and systemically grounded strategies that align with teachers' professional aspirations and the institutional mission [38,59]. Aligning incentives with broader educational values can strengthen teacher motivation, increase job satisfaction, and support a thriving, inclusive school environment.

1. Odden A (2019) School finance: A policy perspective. McGraw-Hill Education. USA.
2. Lentini V, Gimenez G, Valbuena J (2024) Teachers’ preferences for incentives to work in disadvantaged districts: A discrete choice experiment in Costa Rica. Economic Analysis and Policy. 82: 831-845.
3. Atkinson A, Burgess S, Croxson B, Gregg P (2009) Evaluating the impact of performance-related pay for teachers in England. Labour Economics 16: 251-261.
4. Sahlberg P (2015) Finnish lessons 2.0: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? Teachers College Press, USA.
5. Chatzipanagiotou P, Katsarou E (2023) Crisis management, school leadership in disruptive times and the recovery of schools in the post COVID-19 era: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences 13: 118.
6. Ingersoll RM (2001) Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal 38: 499-534.
7. Borman GD, Dowling NM (2008) Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research 78: 367-409.
8. Nyberg AJ, Pieper JR, Trevor CO (2016) Pay-for-performance’s effect on future employee performance: Integrating psychological and economic principles toward a contingency perspective. Journal of Management 42: 1753-1783.
9. Heath RL (2020) Crisis communication: Risk, recovery, and resilience. Waveland Press, USA.
10. Deci EL, Koestner R, Ryan RM (1999) A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin 125: 627-668.
11. Day C, Gu Q (2010) The new lives of teachers. Routledge, UK.
12. Uriesi S (2017) Efficiency of pay for performance programs in Romanian companies and the mediating role of organizational justice. Scientific Annals of Economics and Business 64: 1-18.
13. Dewi SR, Suryamarta R, Kurnia D (2020) Sense of belonging and job satisfaction on employee performance. Proceedings of the International Conference on Community Development (ICCD 2020)
14. Johnson S (2006) The workplace matters: Teacher quality, retention, and effectiveness. National Education Association, USA.
15. Ladley D, Wilkinson I, Young L (2015) The impact of individual versus group rewards on work group performance and cooperation: A computational social science approach. Journal of Business Research, 68: 2412-2425.
16. Skaalvik EM, Skaalvik S (2011) Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teacher Education 27: 1029-1038.
17. Ferreira DC, Marques RC, Nunes AM (2019) Pay for performance in health care: A new best practice tariff-based tool using a log-linear piecewise frontier function and a dual–primal approach for unique solutions. Operations Research. Advance online publication 68: 1285-1624.
18. Aljumah A (2023) The impact of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on job satisfaction: The mediating role of transactional leadership. Cogent Business & Management 10: 2270813.
19. Collie RJ, Shapka JD, Perry NE (2012) School climate and social–emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology 104: 1189-1204.
20. Herzberg F, Mausner B, Snyderman BB (1959) The motivation to work. Wiley, USA.
21. Springer MG, Ballou D, Hamilton L, Le V-N, Lockwood JR, et al. (2011) Teacher pay for performance: Experimental evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching (POINT). Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, USA.
22. Spinthiropoulos K, Tsiatsiou E, Garefalakis A, Chaitidis G, Stavropoulou E (2021). Greek economic crisis management program and its impact on public employees’ earnings: A case series and literature review. Polish Journal of Management Studies 24: 431-448.
23. Koustourakis G, Asimaki A, Giachali T (2019) The effect of primary school teachers’ experiences on the signification of their pedagogical work as a result of the consequences of the economic crisis in their everyday reality. American International Journal of Contemporary Research 9: 1-9.
24. Botou A, Mylonakou-Keke I, Kalouri O, Tsergas N (2017) Primary school teachers’ resilience during the economic crisis in Greece. Psychology 8: 131-159.
25. Vroom VH (1964) Work and motivation. John Wiley & Sons, USA.
26. Deci EL, Ryan RM (2000) The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11: 227-268.
27. OECD (2020) Strengthening the governance of skills systems: Lessons from six OECD countries. OECD Publishing, USA.
28. Holme JJ, Jabbar H, Germain E, Dinning J (2017) Rethinking teacher turnover: Longitudinal measures of instability in schools. Educational Researcher 47: 62-75.
29. Lemon N, Turner K (2024) Unravelling the wellbeing needs of Australian teachers: A qualitative inquiry. The Australian Educational Researcher 51: 2161-2181.
30. Heneman HG, Milanowski AT (2004) Alignment of human resource practices and teacher performance competency. Peabody Journal of Education 79: 108-125.
31. Kraft MA, Marinell WH, Shen-Wei Yee D (2016) School organizational contexts, teacher turnover, and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal 53: 1411-1449.
32. Podgursky MJ, Springer MG (2007) Teacher performance pay: A review. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 26: 909-950.
33. See BH, Morris R, Gorard S, Kokotsaki D, Abdi S (2020) Teacher recruitment and retention: A critical review of international evidence of most promising interventions. Education Sciences 10: 262.
34. Ryan RM, Deci EL (2017) Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press, USA.
35. Lavy V (2007) Using performance-based pay to improve the quality of teachers. The Future of Children 17: 87-109.
36. Spyriádou K, Koutoúzis M (2021) Politikí kai ekpaideftikí dioíkisi: Asymmetríes kai anisótites stin ellinikí protováthmia ekpaídefsi [Politics and educational administration: Asymmetries and inequalities in Greek primary education]. Diálogoi! Theoría kai práxi stis epistímes agogís kai ekpaídefsis 185-210.
37. Bryson A, Barth E, Dale-Olsen H (2013) The effects of organizational change on worker well-being and the moderating role of trade unions. ILR Review 66: 989-1011.
38. Schleicher A (2018) How to build a 21st-century school system. OECD Publishing, USA.
39. Saks K, Hunt P, Leijen Ä, Lepp L (2025) From zero collaboration to teamwork: Forms of teacher collaboration and factors that support or hinder it. Education Sciences 15: 87-87.
40. Korkmaz AV, Engen ML, Knappert L, Schalk R (2022) About and beyond leading uniqueness and belongingness: A systematic review of inclusive leadership research. Human Resource Management Review 32: 100894.
41. Gani NA, Kusumaningrum A, Dewi NK, Kartiko A, Anuha AN (2022) The effect of compensation and empowerment on teacher and staff’s loyalty. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan 14: 7205-7216.
42. Springer MG, Pane JF, Le V-N, McCaffrey DF, Burns SF, et al. (2012) Team pay for performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 34: 367-390.
43. Paredes-Saavedra M, Vallejos M, Huancahuire-Vega S, Morales-García WC, Geraldo-Campos LA (2024) Work team effectiveness: Importance of organizational culture, work climate, leadership, creative synergy, and emotional intelligence in university employees. Administrative Sciences 14: 280-280.
44. Berg A (2015) Financial incentives and teacher performance. SSRN Electronic Journal 2015: 41.
45. Garbers Y, Konradt U (2014) The effect of financial incentives on performance: A quantitative review of individual and team-based financial incentives. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 87: 102-137.
46. Francis F, Zirra CTO, Charles MI (2020) Reward system as a strategy to enhance employees performance in an organization. Archives of Business Research 8: 156-164.
47. Skaalvik EM, Skaalvik S (2018) Job demands and job resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Social Psychology of Education 21: 1251-1275.
48. Kim NN, Hang N (2024) Rewards, knowledge sharing and individual work performance: An empirical study. Cogent Business & Management 11.
49. OECD (2019) Education at a glance 2019. OECD, USA.
50. Nguyen D, Pietsch M, Gümüs S (2021) Collective teacher innovativeness in 48 countries: Effects of teacher autonomy, collaborative culture, and professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education 106:
51. Holmström A, Tuominen H, Laasanen M, Veermans M (2023) Teachers’ work engagement and burnout profiles: Associations with sense of efficacy and interprofessional collaboration in school. Teaching and Teacher Education 132:
52. Barnes CM, Hollenbeck JR, Jundt DK, DeRue DS, Harmon SJ (2011) Mixing individual incentives and group incentives: Best of both worlds or social dilemma? Journal of Management 37: 1611-1635.
53. Homburg C, Schyma TR, Hohenberg S, Atefi Y, Ruhnau R-CM (2023) “Coopetition” in the presence of team and individual incentives: Evidence from the advice network of a sales organization. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 52: 306-328.
54. Hallinger P, Heck RH (2011) Exploring the journey of school improvement: Classifying and analyzing patterns of change in school improvement processes and learning outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 22: 1-27.
55. Ortan F, Simut C, Simut R (2021) Self-efficacy, job satisfaction and teacher well-being in the K-12 educational system. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18.
56. Toropova A, Myrberg E, Johansson S (2021) Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review 73: 1-27.
57. Magtalas SA (2024) Teacher’s workload in relation to burnout and work performance. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research 5: 4111-4123.
58. Dewi AER, Kalil NC, Hidayat H, Juniati SR (2024) Exploring the relationship between teacher professional development and student learning outcomes. Journal of Pedagogi 1: 109-116.
59. Assaf J, Antoun S (2024) Impact of job satisfaction on teacher well-being and education quality. Pedagogical Research 9: 0204.
60. Harrison MG, King RB, Wang H (2023) Satisfied teachers are good teachers: The association between teacher job satisfaction and instructional quality. British Educational Research Journal 49.
61. Toropova A, Myrberg E, Johansson S (2021) Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review 73: 1-27.
62. Béteille T, Loeb S (2009) Teacher quality and teacher labor markets. In: Sykes G, Schneider B, Plank DN (Eds.). Handbook of Education Policy Research, Routledge 596-612.
63. Jensen B, Reichl J (2011) Better teacher appraisal and feedback: Improving performance. Grattan Institute, Australia.
64. Bakker AB, Demerouti E (2017) Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 22: 273-285.
65. Singh YK, Gautam DNS (2024) The impact of job satisfaction on teacher mental health: A call to action for educational policymakers. Open Education Studies 6.
66. Harris DN, Adams SJ (2007) Understanding the level and causes of teacher turnover: A comparison with other professions. Economics of Education Review 26: 325-337.
67. Richardson PW, Watt HMG (2016) Factors influencing teaching choice: Why do future teachers choose the career? Springer, USA.
68. Fryer RG (2013) Teacher incentives and student achievement: Evidence from New York City public schools. Journal of Labor Economics 31: 373-407.
69. Leigh A (2013) The economics and politics of teacher merit pay. CESifo Economic Studies 59: 1-33.
70. Grammatikoú KS (2016) Epaggelmatikí ikanopíisi ekpaideftikón A/Thmias Ekpaídefsis os pros tis synthíkes ergasías [Job satisfaction of primary education teachers with regard to working conditions]. Ekpaídefsi, Dia Víou Máthisi, Érevna kai Technologikí Anáptyxi, Kainotomía kai Oikonomía 1: 152-162.
71. Ganimian A, Murnane R, Alfonso M, Álvarez Trongé M, Barrera-Osorio F, et al. (2014) Improving educational outcomes in developing countries: Lessons from rigorous evaluations. National Bureau of Economic Research, USA.
72. Bruns B, Lugue J (2015) Great teachers: How to raise student learning in Latin America and the Caribbean. World Bank Group, USA.
73. Lavy V (2009) Performance pay and teachers’ effort, productivity, and grading ethics. American Economic Review 99: 1979-2011.
74. Deng Z, Gopinathan S (2016) PISA and high-performing education systems: Explaining Singapore’s education success. Comparative Education 52: 449-472.
75. Dee TS, Wyckoff J (2015) Incentives, selection, and teacher performance: Evidence from IMPACT. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 34: 267-297.
76. Blackmore J, Hobbs L, Rowlands J (2023) Aspiring teachers, financial incentives, and principals’ recruitment practices in hard-to-staff schools. Journal of Education Policy 39: 175-194.
77. Marsden D, Belfield R (2006) Pay for performance where output is hard to measure: The case of performance pay for school teachers. Advances in Industrial & Labor Relations 1-34.
78. Weibel A, Rost K, Osterloh M (2010) Pay for performance in the public sector—Benefits and (hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20: 387-412.
79. Rehman S, Shahrukh HM, Virk AM, Butt M (2019) Pay for performance (PFP) increasing creativity through intrinsic motivation. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science 8: 74-90.