Unit Assessment: CHRM Reward Management (5RMT)
Unit Type: Optional
Background to Unit – Reward Management
The reward management unit provides the learner with a wide understanding of how the
business context drives reward strategies and policies, including labour market, industrial
and sector trends, regional differences and trends in pay and international comparisons; the
financial drivers of the organisation, the balance sheet and the impact of reward costs. The
learner is required to gather and evaluate intelligence on a wide range of reward data and
show how this impacts upon business decisions. The learner will acquire knowledge of the
perspectives, principles and policies of reward from a theoretical and strategic focus and
learn how to implement them in practice. The learner will be able to assess the contribution
of reward to business viability and advise on the appropriateness of policies and practices to
line managers to promote employee performance.
Learning outcomes
1 Understand the business context of reward and the use of reward intelligence.
2 Understand key reward principles and the implementation of policies and practices.
3 Understand the role of line managers in making reward decisions.
Assessment criteria
1.Understand the business context of 1.1 Assess the context of the reward environment and
reward and the use of reward
key perspectives that inform reward decisions.
intelligence
1.2 Explain the most appropriate ways in which
reward intelligence can be gathered and presented.
2. Understand key reward principles 2.1 Evaluate the principle of total rewards and
and the implementation of policies its importance to reward strategy.
and practices
2.2 Explain the significance of equity, fairness,
consistency and transparency as they affect
reward policies and practices.
2.3 Explain how policy initiatives and practices
are implemented.
3. Understand the role of line
managers in making reward
decisions.
3.1 Explain the various ways in which line managers
contribute to reward decision making.
3.2 Assess the contribution of extrinsic
and intrinsic rewards to improving
employee contribution and sustained
organisation performance.
Ref: RMT/PwCAssBankEQA/SH/Sep2017
Your task (3,900 words)
Using your own organisation (or one with which you are familiar), investigate the reward
environment and produce a written report in which you:
1. Assess the context of the reward environment and the key perspectives that inform
reward decisions. In this section you should: (AC 1.1, 1.2)
Use an appropriate analysis tool to identify the internal and external factors that
impact an organisations reward policy (e.g. SWOT, PESTLE, etc)
Analyse the particular impact of business drivers and related factors on reward
decisions e.g. affordability, market position, etc
Give examples of different (at least three) types of reward intelligence and how it
is gathered and presented.
2. Demonstrate your understanding of key reward principles and the
implementation of reward policies and practices. In this section you should: (AC
2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.2)
Evaluate the principle of total rewards and its importance to reward strategy.
Identify and explain the importance of equity, fairness, consistency and transparency
in terms of how they should underpin reward policies and practices. You may
illustrate your understanding of these key principles by referring to good practice or
relevant legislation
Assess the contribution of both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards to improving
employee contribution and sustained organisation performance. Refer to academic
research and the literature in this area and illustrate with examples of good practice.
Explain how reward policy initiatives and practices are implemented in your chosen
organisation.
3. Demonstrate your understanding of the role of line managers in making reward
decisions. In this section you should: (AC 3.1)
Explain the various ways line managers contribute to reward decision-making.
Evidence to be produced/required
A written report of approximately 3,900 words in total.
You should relate academic concepts, theories and professional practice to the way
organisations operate, in a critical and informed way, and with reference to key texts, articles
and other publications and by using organisational examples for illustration.
All reference sources should be acknowledged correctly and a bibliography provided where
appropriate (these should be excluded from the word count). Demonstrating evidence of wider
reading through appropriate referencing will improve your answer and increase the likelihood
of your work achieving a Pass.
___________________________________________________________
Submission Checklist
1. Assignment cover sheet
2. Report (3,900 words)
3. Appendices (if any)
4. References/Bibliography
5. Updated Personal Development Plan
6. Updated Key Learning Summary
Ref: RMT/PwCAssBankEQA/SH/Sep2017
Research report
March 2015
Show me the
money!
The behavioural
science of reward
The CIPD is the professional body for HR and
people development. The not-for-profit organisation
champions better work and working lives and has
been setting the benchmark for excellence in people
and organisation development for more than 100
years. It has more than 135,000 members across
the world, provides thought leadership through
independent research on the world of work, and
offers professional training and accreditation for
those working in HR and learning and development.
Show me the money!
The behavioural science of reward
Research report
Contents
Foreword
2
Executive summary
3
Introduction
6
1 Salaries, pay structures and progression
10
2 Variable pay
14
3 Pensions and benefits
23
4 Executive reward/compensation
30
Conclusions
38
Glossary of terms
40
References
42
Acknowledgements
This report was written by Dr Ben Lupton, Dr Andrew Rowe and Richard Whittle of Manchester
Metropolitan University.
1
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
Foreword
The time is ripe
for a renewed look
at how we design
and apply reward
strategies.
Pay and reward hold a central place
in any HR strategy. They can be a
major lever, not just in recruitment
and retention, but also in improving
performance, shaping behaviours
and supporting constructive
employment relations.
The time is ripe for a renewed
look at how we design and
apply reward strategies. The
challenging global climate has
put pressure on pay budgets, but
the requirement for reward to
support organisational success is
as pressing as ever. At the same
time, there is a growing body of
research from the behavioural
sciences in particular behavioural
economics, cognitive neuroscience
and psychology that provides
insights into human behaviour
at work. This can give us a fuller,
more nuanced understanding of
what incentivises employees.
Increasing attention is being paid
to the application of behavioural
science to the field of management.
Recent CIPD reports have been a
part of this trend, exploring how
insights from behavioural science
can shed new light on learning and
development. This report does the
same for the area of reward.
The report forms part of an
ongoing programme of research in
which we are applying insights from
behavioural science to different
aspects of HR. Following this
report, we will be taking a more
in-depth view of executive pay,
to explore the opportunities and
challenges that exist in developing
remuneration packages that
encourage and sustain desirable
CEO behaviour. Alongside this, we
will also undertake research into
the behavioural science of another
key area of HR, how we recruit and
select talent.
We believe the application of
behavioural science insights
to people management and
development has the potential to
be game changing. We hope you
find this report enlightening and a
useful addition to what has been
called brain savvy HR (Hills 2014).
Charles Cotton,
Reward Adviser, CIPD
Jonny Gifford,
Research Adviser, CIPD
March 2015
We know we need to supplement
theories of rational behaviour
and decision-making with insights
into how people actually behave in
practice. But how does this apply
to the complex area of pay and
reward? What does behavioural
science tell us about our responses
to different forms of incentive,
and how might this translate in an
employment setting to base pay,
bonuses, pay rises and benefits?
2
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
Executive summary
This report has two core aims:
to give an overview of relevant
research in behavioural science to
all those who have a responsibility
for, or an interest in, employee
reward; and to identify how these
can be applied to make pay and
benefit practices more effective.
Behavioural science has a broad
scope, encompassing psychology,
cognitive neuroscience and
behavioural economics. Historically,
reward thinking has been built
on the foundations of motivation
theory, traditional economic theory
and insights from occupational
psychology, sociology, philosophy
and other disciplines. More recent
advances in behavioural science in
particular in behavioural economics
and neuroscience offer a range of
original perspectives on the topic
and can shed new light on some
familiar organisational challenges.
For example, it can offer insights
into how:
our brains respond to the
promise of rewards
different rewards, for example
tangible and intangible, financial
and non-financial, influence our
behaviour
we perceive fairness in rewards
and respond to injustices
our cognitive biases affect our
response to rewards and our
choices
decision-making shortcuts
(heuristics) affect our behaviour
in relation to rewards.
The report applies these ideas, and
many others, to four aspects of
reward.
3
Firstly, we look at base pay,
pay structures and the market.
We explore the implications of
individuals subjective valuing
of rewards, and their approach
to equity, for the setting of pay
rates. We examine how individuals
estimate their own worth, and
how they respond to the prospect
of progression in pay scales (or
barriers to it).
The evidence we review highlights a
number of key points. We see that
individuals have a subjective view
of their own worth which varies
over time, being affected by factors
such as the wider economic climate
and how they compare their own
reward and skills to those of peers.
As such, we suggest that systems
for determining base pay will need
to be dynamic and flexible in line
with employees expectations.
…systems for
determining base
pay will need to
be dynamic and
flexible in line
with employees
expectations.
Another key finding regards the
endowment bias, the tendency
to overvalue our own skills in
relation to others. This can play
out in various ways, including, for
example, the loss people at the top
of pay scales perceive when they
face barriers to pay progression.
Having more flexibility in base pay
structures can help counter such
examples of endowment bias.
However, there is a balance to be
struck. Evidence from behavioural
science suggests that our need
for fairness is deeply ingrained
and we seek demonstrable rigour
and transparency in determining
pay and progression, both for
procedural and distributive justice.
Clearly, this challenge becomes
greater the more that flexibility is
built into the system.
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
…rewards with an
individual element
do satisfy a need
for individual
recognition…
The second theme explored is
variable pay and how individuals
respond to incentives of various
kinds. We consider the different
effects on peoples behaviour of
financial and non-financial incentives,
deferred rewards and team or
organisation-wide incentives.
We find that money has a powerful
effect on behaviour, over and
above those arising purely from its
value, and including unintended
and distorting effects. More
generally, in certain contexts,
tangible rewards run the risk of
undermining intrinsic motivation
(the desire to do a good job). They
appear to work best in areas where
little intrinsic motivation is present,
and when the incentives support
individuals need for autonomy and
a sense of competence.
Incentive systems based on team or
individual performance may build
in dissatisfaction and diminishing
returns, as we tend to compare
our contributions more favourably
than those of others. However,
rewards with an individual element
do satisfy a need for individual
recognition, and the resulting
impact on recruitment and retention
of high-performers may outweigh
these difficulties.
Deferred incentives, such as shares,
also face disadvantages because we
fail to fully value future rewards. This
points to a need, where these are
used, to communicate information
about their value regularly.
Thirdly, we look at employee
responses to pensions and benefits
as rewards. We particularly focus
on how cognitive biases and
rules of thumb affect behaviour
in relation to pensions. We also
consider how people respond to
choice in flexible benefits and the
withdrawal of benefits.
4
Traditionally, there has been wide
support for offering pension
contributions above the required
minimum, in particular because of
the benefits seen in staff attraction
and retention. Evidence from
behavioural science suggests
employees tend to significantly
undervalue the employers
contributions except in very late
career, suggesting that, like deferred
incentives, pensions dont punch
their weight as an element of
reward. However, proactively and
regularly communicating the value
of pension contributions can help
counter this.
Other benefits, such as healthcare,
company cars or gym membership,
can form an important and effective
part of a reward strategy. Where
there is an element of flexibility,
they may additionally support
diversity and autonomy, but
employees may in fact perceive
having to make a decision as a cost.
Avoiding making a choice may lead
to inertia, retaining a form of benefit
that is no longer valued. There is
thus a case for minimising the range
of benefits offered and simplifying
the process of selecting them.
It is also worth noting that the
subjective value of a benefit to an
individual can reduce over time,
resulting in a perceived loss, as with
the removal of a benefit. Such losses
are experienced as greater than the
original value of the benefit. We
argue employers should refresh the
benefits offered, try to avoid offering
benefits that may need to be taken
away and think carefully about
whether removal is necessary.
Finally, we turn to executive reward.
We look first at how cognitive
biases affect executives responses
to reward packages of different
kinds and how this shapes their
behaviour, for better or worse.
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
For example, executives tend to
evaluate risk in reward and favour
immediate gratification over the
longer term. This can be used to
explain short-termism and risky
behaviours, but also raises concerns
that attempts to address such
behaviours could trigger adverse
reactions from executives.
We then examine how the decisions
of remuneration committees
can themselves be influenced
by biases and decision-making
heuristics. The impact of reward is
complex in respect to remuneration
committees, as a non-executive
director in one board might well be
influenced by their experience as an
executive in another organisation.
A practical recommendation
is to support remuneration
committees and other stakeholders
to understand how their biases
and instinctive responses shape
reactions to remuneration deals.
It is important to understand the
neurological impact of poorly
presented reward packages.
Ten key behavioural considerations for pay and reward professionals
1 Pay and reward decisions have an emotional or subjective component.
2 Individuals preference and satisfaction levels in relation to reward are dynamic, not fixed. External events, for
example a recession, can affect individuals confidence, altering their satisfaction with current reward offers.
3P
ay and reward also has a social context, in that we value not only our individual need but make
comparison with others. This may be deep-rooted in the functioning of the human brain.
4T
he implications of pay and reward are highly complex, as individuals and organisations need to assess
not only present but also future need.
5 Financial or similarly tangible incentives may crowd out peoples underlying (intrinsic) motivations.
6 Money may have distinctive and powerful effects on behaviour, more so than those engendered by other
rewards of equivalent value.
7T
he complexity of decisions around reward means that people use shortcuts (heuristics), which influence
their decision-making.
8 Choices in benefits or pensions may be responded to as a cost rather than an opportunity, and should thus
be limited and meaningful.
9 Deferred reward implies sacrificing immediate consumption for a future reward. We tend to undervalue
the future reward, so employers need to counter this through education and communication.
10 Risk and uncertainty in reward (for example, in a performance-linked bonus) may reduce the subjective
value that employees place on it and can affect their behavioural responses.
Questions for HR professionals to ask themselves
A
re you dealing with jobs that rely on high levels of autonomy, mastery and purpose? If so, it may be less
appropriate to link pay directly with individual performance.
H
ow important is collaborative behaviour in your organisation or department? This can be encouraged by
team-based reward and backed up by individual reward and/or recognition.
H
ow much choice do you offer employees in their benefit packages? Too much can be treated as a cost, so
restrict the number of options to a few meaningful ones if possible.
W
hen did you last refresh your organisations benefit offering? The value placed on a benefit by an
employee can reduce over time.
ow aware are your employees of the value of their pension contributions? Raising understanding through
H
financial education and communication increases the value people place on pensions.
5
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
Introduction
…there has
been increasing
interest in what
the behavioural
sciences have
to offer for an
understanding
of people in
organisations,
and what the
implications are for
decision-makers
This report is for all those people
management and public policy
professionals who have a role,
or interest, in the design and
implementation of pay and
benefit systems in organisations.
It provides an introduction to a
body of research evidence from
the emerging field of behavioural
science broadly encompassing
psychology, cognitive neuroscience
and behavioural economics and
explores how these findings may be
applied to the field of organisational
reward. Specifically, the report
examines the potential contribution
of behavioural science in four areas
base pay, variable pay, pensions
and benefits and executive reward
in each case exploring what the
behavioural perspective can offer
reward professionals and identifying
implications for practice. The report
aims to broaden the evidence base
that informs reward decisions and to
offer reward strategists new insights,
and an original perspective, on
contemporary reward issues.
Context
These are interesting and
challenging times for reward
professionals. The difficult economic
climate means that organisations
often have less room for manoeuvre
in designing their reward strategies.
Yet the perennial challenges that
HR professionals face in this field
still remain the need for the
reward systems to:
6
be aligned with the
organisations strategy
attract and retain the workforce
required to deliver strategies
encourage better performance,
and shape attitudes and
behaviours
reward people in a way that
does not create disaffection or
dispute.
One of the reasons that the design
of reward strategy requires highlevel knowledge and expertise
is that these imperatives do not
always pull in the same direction.
When we also consider the
restricted budgets available to
deliver them (not to mention
increasing globalisation and the
changing regulatory environment),
we can see that the decisions,
choices and trade-offs increase
further in complexity.
HR professionals have been able to
draw on a wealth of research and
theory to inform their decisions
from disciplines such as economics
and psychology. Recently, however,
there has been increasing interest
in what the behavioural sciences
have to offer for an understanding
of people in organisations, and
what the implications are for
decision-makers (Senior et al 2011,
Becker et al 2011). The CIPD has
taken a lead in exploring these
insights (CIPD 2014), for instance
in relation to the field of learning
and development. Behavioural
thinking has been applied widely in
other fields (for example financial
services, FCA 2013; the study of
house prices, Whittle et al 2014)
and informs government thinking
(the Behavioural Insight, or nudge,
Unit) in relation to a range of
policy measures, but has not yet
received broad application to the
field of organisational reward. This
report takes a significant step in
addressing that omission.
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
What is behavioural science
and what can it offer?
The term behavioural science
encompasses a broad range of
disciplines and perspectives. The
main strands that inform this report
are psychology, organisational
cognitive neuroscience (OCN) and
behavioural economics.
These approaches offer a departure
from the existing psychological and
economic theories that underpin
our understanding of how people
behave in relation to organisational
rewards.
For example, OCN offers to
go beyond traditional theories
of motivation by considering
the role of neurophysiological
processes as the fundamental
drivers of individual, group and
organisational phenomena (Healey
and Hodgkinson 2014, p768).
Experimental research has shown
how the brain responds to the
prospect and delivery of rewards,
and how this response varies in
relation to the form (for example,
tangible/intangible) and timing
of rewards. Further, research
into the social brain explores
the distinctive and deep-seated
way in which people respond to
issues around justice, fairness and
co-operation. The insights from
this body of research offer new
perspectives on issues of equity
and justice, which lie at the heart of
reward system design. The report
will explore both of these aspects
and consider their implications for
reward strategy.
Behavioural economics provides a
counterweight to more traditional
views of rational economic decisions
and behaviour. The dominant
economic perspective on reward
has been to consider how an
organisation or its management
seeks to alter the behaviour of the
employee by tapping into their
rational (and thus predictable)
desire for reward (an approach
known as principal-agent theory).
As we discuss later and as all
reward practitioners know this
does not always work out so
straightforwardly. Behavioural
economics has the potential to
contribute significantly here,
as it offers an appreciation of
the subjective, affective (that
is, emotional) side of peoples
behaviour in relation to the rewards
that they desire and are (or are not)
offered. Satisfaction1 with reward is a
key factor underpinning employees
behaviour in relation to them, for
example whether it attracts or
retains their services, or incentivises
their performance.
To give a flavour of the report, two
of the main behavioural phenomena
that will be discussed below are
cognitive biases and decision-making
shortcuts (known as heuristics).
These are psychological responses
and information processes which
affect our decision-making and levels
of satisfaction and are considered by
Pompian (2012) as the basis of our
internal response to a situation.
See glossary page 40 for
further definitions of terms
Box 1: Basic definitions
Cognitive psychology studies
mental processes, thinking,
memory and perception.
Occupational psychology
applies psychology
to recruitment, people
management and learning
and development.
Organisational cognitive
neuroscience (OCN)
explores the relationship
between the biology
underlying mental processes
and behaviour in organisations.
Behavioural economics
examines how psychological
and social factors impact on
economic decisions.
For instance, our cognitive biases
in relation to confidence have a
considerable impact on how we
value an offering, and how satisfied
we are with it. If we are confident
about our ability to command a
greater reward elsewhere, we may
be less satisfied with the level of
reward we currently enjoy. Our
level of confidence has a dual
nature: at any one time we can be
both under- and overconfident
not knowing whether or not our
confidence levels are correct until
the next time period. This means, in
effect, that we are taking a gamble,
the success of which is correlated
to the external wider economic
factor and thus likely to be a win
1 We use the term satisfaction in this sense throughout the report (except where the context indicates otherwise), that is, to refer to satisfaction with reward
specifically, not more generally with the job, the organisation, and so on.
7
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
Box 2: Bias and heuristics
Cognitive biases internal
responses and reactions
which can result in a different
decision being made than
would be externally rational.
Heuristics these are the
rules of thumb that people
acquire from experience that
act as shortcuts to making
decisions instead of making
exhaustive evaluations of
relevant information.
Box 3: How we assess the
value of future rewards
Prospect theory a theory
that shows how individuals
determine the perceived value
of losses and gains. It states
that people make decisions
based on the potential value
of gains and losses rather
than what actually happens.
The theory suggests, for
example, that individuals tend
to overweight subjectively the
value of a loss compared with a
gain. Quite simply, an individual
who loses £5 and the next day
finds £5 will not break even
psychologically.
Temporal discounting
suggests that deferral of a
reward will lead to a perceived
reduction of its value. In
addition, our perceived value
of the same reward diminishes
over time.
8
in a period of economic recovery or
boom; this can result in increased
confidence and increased upward
pressure on reward.
Our level of ability to consider
the future and make accurate
assessments of future worth
(temporal discounting) has
considerable impact on our
perception of the value of reward.
Of particular importance for this
report is the perception of the
value of deferred rewards, be
they pension contributions, share
ownership schemes or delayed
bonuses. For example, Kahneman
and Tversky (1979) have shown
how deferment often impacts
detrimentally on the level of
employees expectation an aspect
of prospect theory suggesting
that employees may find it difficult
to be satisfied, for example, with
pension contributions as a form of
reward (though social norms and
societal expectations may partly
outweigh this difficulty).
In addition to considering a
range of cognitive biases and
their implications for reward
management, we also consider
the impact of heuristics the
shortcuts we use as laypeople
when having to process
large amounts of information
or different choices. These
simplifications in the face of
complexity can lead to error or
skew choices. For example, the
Financial Conduct Authority
Occasional Paper on behavioural
economics and financial services
(2013) demonstrates this in relation
to peoples pension decisions.
It highlights the difficulties that
people have in making key
decisions because they lack
opportunities to learn about the
various complex products available
and choosing requires tradeoffs between present and future
rewards and the role of emotions
(for example anxiety or regret).
Heuristics have also been shown
to be employed by those who are
responsible for designing reward
systems, for example executive
remuneration committees, with
similar unexpected or undesirable
effects such as groupthink, indicating
why there are accusations of reward
packages encouraging short-termism
and profiteering by senior executives.
The report will consider these and
the impact of other heuristics in
greater detail below.
Behavioural science:
limitations and possibilities
Before embarking on the detail
of the report, we offer a note
of balance and perspective. An
earlier CIPD report (2014, p5)
commented that behavioural
science offers no panacea, and we
concur with that. As this report
considers, cognitive neuroscience
can have value in showing how
rewards affect us at the deepest,
sometimes unconscious level
and we are better informed for
these insights; however, there are
limits in extrapolating from this to
complex social contexts in which
organisational reward systems
reside. As Healey and Hodgkinson
(2014) note, there are difficulties
with the idea that behaviour can
be reduced to discrete neurological
processes. Trying to explain complex
social behaviour by observing
particular activated regions of the
brain has obvious limitations, as it
tells us little about the nature of
wider contextual factors, for example
leaderstaff relationships, or why
teams function in certain ways.
Also, research in this area relies
upon experimental designs and is
often carried out in laboratory-type
settings. While these methodologies
provide very useful insights as the
report discusses there is a need
for more research in contextually
rich settings (CIPD 2014, Brink and
Rankin 2013) such as organisations
themselves as opposed to just
experimental settings.
Show me the money! The behavioural science of reward
Behavioural economics adds a layer
of subjectivity and perception to
the economic models, and in doing
so provides a richer understanding
of peoples behaviour in relation
to organisational rewards than the
traditional economic approaches
that have underpinned reward
thinking. At the very least it
provides a new vocabulary and
perspective on these issues, and
some reinforcement from another
discipline on what is already
debated. As the report will show, in
other areas, for example in relation
to deferred rewards (pensions,
shares, and so on) decision-making
and choice, it promises to offer
genuinely new insights for the
reward practitioner to consider.
However, there will be those
who question whether it offers
anything genuinely new to our
understanding. It is true that the
behavioural approach highlights, for
example, the potential deleterious
consequences of financial incentives
and the damaging effects of
perceived inequities. However,
some may argue that existing
psychological and sociological
approaches do this adequately
already, and possibly draw on a
richer and deeper understanding of
human relations at work. But even
here, behavioural science offers
a new way of approaching and
grasping familiar problems.
behave sustainably (as we discuss
below), the ethical assessment
would surely be different.
Structure of the report
The report is organised around
four aspects of reward strategy
base pay, variable pay, pensions
and benefits and executive reward
there follows a section on each
of these. These sections provide
an overview of recent studies in
behavioural science and consider
their implications for organisations
reward strategies. In doing so they
will address the key choices that HR
strategists face in designing reward
systems and their components we
call these the what, the how, the
who and the when:
Behavioural
science offers
a new way of
approaching and
grasping familiar
problems.
the what the form of the
reward and its size
the how the means of
determining the reward
the who the recipient(s) of the
reward for example individual/
team
the when whether the reward
is immediate or deferred.
Each chapter concludes with a
summary of key points and their
implications, and the final section of
the report draws together the key
issues for practitioners to consider
in drawing on the insights of
behavioural science.
Others may question the ethics of
using behavioural science in the
reward field, citing associations
with manipulation, subliminal
messaging and the like (CIPD 2014).
This is a wider debate that cannot
be resolved here, but there is
nothing in this report that provides
an obvious toolkit for ethically
dubious interventions. The ethical
implications surely
Recent Comments