I have worked for a university which, under budget pressure, allocated for < 1% average annual raise, but STILL put all the effort into review to spread it out

I have worked for a university which, under budget pressure, allocated for < 1% average annual raise, but STILL put all the effort into review to spread it out so some got .7%, some got .8% and so on. What I remarked from this was: all the pain and anxiety with none of the benefit. More recently, the company I work for seems to have moved away from an emphasis on raises and towards an emphasis on bonuses. Somehow for me this is psychologically infinitely superior. I actually can't remember the time series of my bonuses. I suppose if the company was stupid, it would report my bonus as "your bonus is 20% lower than last time" or "your bonus is 30% higher than last time." But they just report the amount. Contrast that with salary changes, which in my experience have always been reported to the employee as a percent change, just in case the employee was not thinking that way anyway. What these guys are doing appeals to me very much. The real changes in salary come from moving up and down the ranks, which is a public process even though not transparetly linke to salary changes generally. A super simple salary system is very appealing to me. Give me my feedback in significant (>1% effects) chunks, and keep me from doing the equivalent of staring at 16 indistinguishable brands of soap wondering how they picked Tide for me.