November 2nd, 2011 by Ken Gibson
Great compensation solutions come to those who ask the right questions. It’s as straight forward as that. And there is a cascading sequence to an effective questioning process as it relates to compensation development and design. Let’s explore what that might include.
Stage One
The first level of inquiry has to do with broad strategic issues. Since compensation is a “strategic” tool, not a “tactical” one, the questions must start here.
- What is the vision of ownership for the “future company?” In what ways will the company be different three years from now than it is today? (Be as specific as possible.)
- What are the potential barriers that could keep that vision from being fulfilled (external and internal)?
- What key opportunities and initiatives have to be seized and effectively implemented if that vision is going to be realized?
- Who are the people that will drive those opportunities and are key to overcoming the barriers described?
- Do you have all the people in place now you will need to realize the vision you have described or will new people be recruited?
Stage Two
With a clear and compelling vision in mind, you are ready to address level two questions.
- What is the business model of the company; the performance engine that keeps revenue flowing and will fuel growth?
- What roles are in place to support that business model and what expectations have been set for those roles? (Presumably these are some of the same people mentioned above.)
- If you implement a compensation strategy that works, how should the outcomes produced by this group be improved or changed?
Stage Three
Now that we have addressed the vision and business model, we’re ready to talk more specifically about compensation related issues.
- What do you believe people should be paid for primarily? Time spent working? Outcomes (if so which?)? Knowledge and experience?
- In what ways are you paying people now that is supportive both of that philosophy and the business model you described in stage two?
- How and to what extent should people be paid for maintaining the present performance engine of the company?
- How and to what extent should people be paid for innovation and contributing to the future growth of the company?
Stage Four
With a working pay philosophy established in stage three, we’re now in a better position to be more granular in our compensation questions.
- Where do we want to set salaries vis a vis market pay?
- Where do we want total compensation to be vis a vis market pay?
- Are those answers the same for each tier of employee in the company?
- Do we want to share equity?
- If we don’t want to share equity, do we want some level of pay to be reflective of company value?
- If we don’t want to tie pay to company value, what financial metrics do we want it tied to?
- What balance should there be between short-term value sharing (performance over 12 months or less) and long-term (performance over 12 months).
Certainly, there are still many more questions to be asked and answered before your compensation strategy will be ready and complete. However, hopefully this list gives you a sense for the train of thought that should inform the compensation discussion in a company that wants to grow and realize ownerships’ vision for the future.
Tags: breakthrough success, compensation philosophy and strategy, employee stock, employee stock owenership, employee stock ownership, Growth, incentive stock, incentives, long-term shareholder value, Pay for performance
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Managing Talent, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
October 27th, 2011 by Tom Miller
So what’s the best way to award phantom stock to employees? In my view it’s through Phantom Stock Options.
This one is my favorite, and it’s the most popular plan we design at VisionLink. Stock options (real ones) are attractive because they’re “win-win.” Employees only win if the other shareholders win (by seeing their stock price go up by a value that exceeds the amount by which they were diluted). In a public company environment there are markets that help to handle the exercise of the option. However, in a private company no such market exists. Instead, the employee and the company sponsor have to work out the cash flow mechanics of the exercise. And there’s no “cashless exercise” arrangement that permits the employee to get a reduced number of shares by surrendering a portion of his options to cover the strike price.
So let’s use phantom options. Easy. Recall that phantom stock is a cash compensation arrangement. Assume we give Sally (remember her–our top sales executive?) 5,000 phantom options with a starting value of $10. What will she really have at that point? Nothing—because the options must go up in value before she realizes any gain. But later, when the phantom share price reaches $18 and it’s time for redemption, Sally is simply handed a check for $40,000 (($18-$10) X 5000). No muss, no fuss. Sally doesn’t need to scrape together the $50,000 to exercise the options. She simply receives a nice payment that reflects a reward for her contribution to growth in company EBITDA. Sally has tight alignment with the shareholders without the pain and complication of dealing with a stock transaction. (And you have a happy employee without the headaches of another shareholder.)
By the way, what’s described here as a phantom stock option is also known as a Stock Appreciation Right. However, some find the term phantom stock option more appealing and descriptive.
So have you picked the right plan for your company? Next we’ll look at how you begin to set it up.
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Phantom Stock | No Comments »
October 21st, 2011 by Ken Gibson
Let’s face it, business life is accelerating in its complexity. Denial won’t help us overcome it; we must embrace it and learn to manage it. As some organizations attempt to “rein it in,” they find themselves making things worse rather than better. A recent Harvard Business Review article makes the point this way:
“In and of itself, this complexity is not a bad thing—it brings opportunities as well as challenges. The problem is the way companies attempt to respond to it. To reconcile their many conflicting goals, managers redesign the organization’s structure, performance measures, and incentives, trying to align employees’ behavior with shifting external challenges. More layers get added, more procedures imposed. Then, to smooth the implementation of those ‘hard’ changes, companies introduce a variety of ‘soft’ initiatives designed to infuse work with positive emotions and create a workplace where interpersonal relationships and collaboration will flourish.”
Our experience has been similar when we are engaged to help companies design incentive plans. Value sharing arrangements such as bonus programs, phantom stock, profit pools, performance unit plans, etc. should bring greater clarity not complexity. Too often, business leaders want their rewards programs to achieve more than they are designed to and become a substitute for performance management. As a result, they add layers of metrics and measures that are intended to micro manage the results the company wants employees to achieve.
If a value sharing program is going to offer more clarity than complexity, what is that it should make clear? Here’s our list:
- It should make clear that the company considers the employee a key partner in the achievement of its growth goals.
- It should reinforce the company’s business model and the strategy employed to roll it out to the marketplace.
- It should help clarify the role of a given employee in the business model and strategy.
- It should make clear the outcomes the employee is responsible for within that role.
- It should create line of sight between the employee’s personal financial vision and the company’s growth goals and vision.
If a company will use compensation as a clarifier and reinforcer of “what’s important,” it will take a big step towards better managing the complexity that inevitably will continue to grow.
Tags: compensation philosophy and strategy, Employee Trust, Growth, incentives, Pay for performance, phantom stock, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Managing Talent | 1 Comment »
October 17th, 2011 by Tom Miller
Can Sally (our national sales leader) buy phantom stock from the company? Is such a thing possible?
In fact, we can sell Sally phantom shares. Let’s see how it would work.
This is referred to as a Deferred Stock Unit plan—a form of deferred compensation. Sally would be given the opportunity to defer some of her cash compensation (e.g., salary or bonus) into units of phantom stock. Said differently, Sally would “convert” some of her future pay to phantom stock.
An example: Assume Sally makes $200,000 in annual salary. She might defer up to 25% (or more, or less) of her salary into the plan. Assuming she does so she would acquire a deferred compensation interest that would have $50,000 worth of starting value. In other words, she would have 5,000 units of phantom stock (at $10/share) credited to her deferred comp account.
In reality, you’re not selling shares to her. That is, she’s not acquiring an ownership right in exchange for writing you a check. She’s deferring some of her income into an unsecured bookkeeping account that is measured by the growth of the phantom share price. But it has the same essential effect as selling Sally phantom shares. She is voluntarily foregoing wages in order to ‘invest’ in the company! That’s a pretty serious commitment. We’re definitely building an ownership mentality.
Plus, it’s much better for Sally tax-wise than buying actual stock. Why? Because she gets to do it with pre-tax dollars.
Tax-wise for you it’s not perfect, but it’s not so bad. You (or the company) will forego the current tax deduction on the income Sally chooses to defer. However, it’s a delayed deduction, not a lost deduction. Instead, of getting the deduction today of $50,000 (wages) you’ll get the future deduction on $90,000 (assuming our EBITDA growth example given in my previous blog).
This is a pretty flexible and promising arrangement when you have employees who believe in the future of the company and an owner who’s willing to share that growth—for a price.
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Phantom Stock | 2 Comments »
October 6th, 2011 by Tom Miller
So we’ve agreed (haven’t we?) that some form of phantom stock is likely to be better for private businesses. I mentioned that there are
three types of plans that may fit. Here’s the first.
Full value grant. We could give Sally (our senior sales executive) some shares that are valued, in full, at $10 per unit. We’re going to specify some conditions and restrictions (to be discussed later). Nonetheless, we’re committing the full $10 in value times the number of shares we decide to give her. If we give her 5,000 shares she’ll start with a true value of $50,000 (subject to vesting and other restrictions). At some future date she’ll redeem those awards for real cash. Assuming EBITDA grows to $18mm (from $10mm) on her
redemption date, Sally will receive a check for $90,000.
What about Sally’s taxes? Well, remember that with actual stock awards Sally would pay taxes when she received the grant or when the vesting lapsed. With phantom awards, Sally pays no taxes until she actually receives her award value (e.g., the $90k). In this way, she
never has to pay income taxes until she’s in receipt of the actual cash. It’s true that had she received actual stock (and paid the taxes up front) she might have saved some taxes in the long run. However, with phantom stock your tax deduction (i.e., the company’s) is higher than it would have been with actual stock. In the first case (actual stock), your deduction was for $50,000, thus a tax benefit of $20,000 (assuming 40% bracket). With the phantom stock example, you get to deduct the full $90,000, resulting in a tax benefit of $36,000. If
you’re feeling guilty about Sally’s taxes go ahead and give her more shares, enough to result in your “after-tax cost” being the same.
A full-value award of phantom stock may be just right for Sally. But generally, we suggest it only for those special employees who have been involved with the company for some time (i.e., they’ve earned some of the value that exists now). There are better ways for most employees.
Next time: Can we sell phantom shares to employees?
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Phantom Stock | 1 Comment »
September 28th, 2011 by Tom Miller
In my last blog I began the discussion of phantom stock—and why it’s often better for the employer and the employees. Here’s how to go about establishing a plan.
- First, you must establish a way to value the phantom shares. In essence, you’re trying to identify the value of the company. You can obtain a formal appraisal or you can establish the value by a formula. The latter will work best in most
situations. Perhaps the formula will reflect a multiple of EBITDA or Net Income. Any reasonable formula can work. To be safe, use a formula that is going to be less than the actual fair market value you might sell the company for some day. You don’t want the employees’ phantom shares to be valued higher than your own.
- The next step is to create some phantom shares. Pick a number—1 million, 10 million—the number doesn’t matter as long as you have enough to make the plan work with the number of eligible participants you anticipate. This part can sometimes seem confusing or cause concern. “Wait,” you might be thinking, “shouldn’t I use the same number of shares we have outstanding in the company? Aren’t I trying to ‘shadow’ the movement of actual stock?” Actually, no. We don’t like the term ‘shadow stock’ because we’re not trying to replicate actual shares. We’re simply trying to provide an attractive award for employees at a future date. As you’ll see, it doesn’t matter whether there are more or fewer shares
in the plan than in your company. Let’s do an example using EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) as our value indictor:
EBITDA $10,000,000
Multiple selected 5
Formula Value $50,000,000
Shares selected 5,000,000
Starting share price $10
3. Now let’s design our plan. Remember that with actual stock plans we had three choices: (a) give shares, (b) sell shares, or (c) give options (to buy in the future at today’s price). Guess what? We have the same three options. We can simply award Sally (our national sales leader) some phantom shares. Or we can “sell” her some. Or we can create a phantom option.
Coming up—we’ll look at all three of these options using phantom shares.
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Phantom Stock | 1 Comment »
September 15th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
I have recently become somewhat a student of innovation; particularly looking at how great companies and individuals manage to get ideas and products implemented while others stop and stall. Among the things I’ve assimilated in that learning process are the following:
- Great innovators associate. Those that are prone to effective innovation are constantly associating one idea or experience with others. They also systemitize the association process so that it occurs regular and naturally.
- Great innovators question everything. Their curiosity is insatiable and they want to get to the bottom of things. Why are things the way they are? Do they need to be like that?
- Great innovators network. They want to associate with people that have a broad range of backgrounds and experiences so their life view is expansive and their feedback loop is broad.
- Great innovators seek feedback. They want to know what others think before they introduce a product to market. They want it tested. It doesn’t have to be perfect, but it has to meet the right need in the right way.
- Great innovators have a bias towards action. Innovating is not dreaming or wishing or even just being creative. It is about getting ideas implemented and working in a way that transforms the end user’s experience.
There’s more I’ve learned, but let’s work with that list for now. As we examine it in the context of compensation there are some important issues to consider. A company’s approach to building effective rewards needs to follow a similar process:
- Those that develop compensation programs need to be able to view compensation as a dynamic tool and ”associate” each component both with other elements of pay and with the business model of the company. As the company’s innovation cycle continues and expands, the approach to rewards needs to be able to reflect that new reality.
- If individuals are going to create an “innovative” rewards structure, they have to be willing to question everything. What is the outcome we’re trying to drive? Why is that important? How should that outcome be rewarded? When should it be rewarded?
- Innovative companies look beyond the “network” of their own industry in seeking creative ways to properly reward people for value creation. They don’t think in terms of what the peer companies in their “space” are doing. They look at what great, innovative companies are doing and then take lessons from their approaches to everything, including pay.
- Businesses that are effective at every level have a continuous feedback system in place. They measure and assess. They look at data and make decisions based on what that data reveals. Similarly, they seek feedback from their workforce about whether they are succeeeding at creating a sense of partnership, painting a compelling vision and building a sense of unity about the outcomes being pursued. If they aren’t, they use pay as one of their strategic tools to target a better result.
- Companies that get compensation right usually get a lot of other things right because they are prone to act. They don’t let the pursuit of the perfect paralyze them from taking action. They get close enough, they stay focused, they get it done, roll it out and then make adjustments as they need to.
As you approach bettering the compensation strategies you wish to adopt, hopefully you will likewise become a student of innovation. If you do, the horizon of possibilities will expand and your ability to drive results will be magnified.
Tags: breakthrough success, Culture of Confidence, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Key Talent Compensation | No Comments »
September 9th, 2011 by Tom Miller
In my last three blogs I discussed why stock ownership for employees may not be such a good idea. So what’s better?
Phantom Stock—A Better Approach
Each of the ideas for Sally (our Sales VP) had merit. Granting stock is simple and clear-cut. It provides instant recognition and value. It’s great, particularly, for someone who’s been with you for awhile and has made a contribution to your past success. But, the concept carries the baggage we described.
Having Sally buy stock also is intriguing. It deepens her commitment and aligns her with both short-term and long-term goals of the company. But again, baggage.
Stock options are attractive because they’re win-win. Sally only wins if shareholders see their stock value go up. Sally is tied to future growth of the company. But…complexity, cash flow problems (i.e., baggage)
What if we could replicate any or all of these approaches without making Sally an actual owner? Is it possible to generate the ownership value and mentality without the baggage? In a word, yes. We can do it with phantom stock.
Phantom Stock Defined
A phantom stock plan is a contractual agreement wherein a company promises to make cash payments to employees upon the achievement of certain conditions. What’s the purpose? Just as with stock awards, the purpose of a phantom stock plan is to generate an ownership mentality and reward key employees for helping to grow the business value.
However, phantom stock has one big advantage—no sharing of actual equity with the employees. No requirement to open the books. No ownership rights. No need to pay dividends (although some plans do). The existing owners stay in control of 100% of the stock or interest in the company.
At the same time, phantom stock can create comparable or even identical value as actual stock. Next time I’ll outline some of the positive things that happen when you create a plan on behalf of employees–and the ways to do it right.
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Phantom Stock | No Comments »
August 31st, 2011 by Tom Miller
We’ve looked at restricted stock and stock purchase plans. There’s an even more common way to get stock in the hands of employees.
Of course: stock options. Public companies use them commonly. Why shouldn’t you? This would enable Sally (your national sales director) to get some stock at a fair price and help her get capital gain taxation if you sell the company some day.
Maybe. Maybe not.
First of all we still have a cash-flow concern. Sally will need to come up with enough cash to exercise her option after the vesting period has passed. Let’s say the stock is worth $10 today and you give her 5,000 options to buy the stock at that price. Her three year vesting period passes and Sally scrapes together the $50,000 to exercise her options. Let’s assume the company share price has grown to $18 in the meantime. She now has $40,000 of new equity value (($18-$10) X 5,000). How do the taxes work?
There are two different types of options—nonqualified and qualified (or incentive). This isn’t the place to cover the differences in taxes—except to say that incentive options, generally, produce a better tax result for Sally and a worse tax result for you. Meanwhile, Sally may now be in a position to benefit from a future transaction (i.e., sale of the company or IPO) assuming the event occurs at least a year from the date of the exercise of the options.
However, what if neither event ever occurs? You’re back to our original problems of redemptions, dividends, etc. In my “30 plus” years experience coaching companies on these plans I’ve seen many more situations where the “future transaction” doesn’t happen, than it does happen. As a result the majority owner and the owner-employee face the grind of negotiating a “fair” price for the stock at the time of a future separation of service. How well do you think you’ll enjoy that future conversation with Sally’s attorney?
The bottom line: the financial results of stock or stock option awards can appear to justify the effort—under the perfect circumstances. But reality is never as simple as you expect it to be. The majority of private company owners will regret the move to stock awards for employees. The perceived value of employee ownership is, nine times out of ten, not nearly worth the price.[1]
So what should we do instead. Stay tuned.
[1] The author acknowledges the primary exception to the rule: if your company is on a clearly lit IPO track, stock options offer an excellent and efficient way to reward employees.
Tags: Company stock options, employee stock, employee stock ownership, private company stock, restricted stock, restricted stock units
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation | No Comments »
August 29th, 2011 by Tom Miller
Last time we looked at the possibility of granting restricted shares to Sally, the head of your national sales team. We pointed out some of the pitfalls. What other approaches do business owners take to get stock in the hands of their leadership teams. After all, creating an ownership connection with employees sounds like a great idea.
Second approach: Sally could buy stock. Now she’s putting her own money into the deal. Investing her own capital will tie Sally more closely to the success of the company. Hopefully so. It’s not the worst of ideas. But, you still have many of the same problems discussed last time. The open books. The discussion about your compensation. The little chat about the size of dividends. Redemption issues. Buy-and-sell agreements. Termination-of-employment loose ends. And does Sally even have the cash to buy in? If she was going to be concerned about the taxes on a grant, how is she going to come up with the full amount needed to purchase the shares?
Maybe you’ll think it’s a good idea to lend her the money. Think about that one. You’ll loan her the money that she can give back to you (to buy the stock) so that you can have all the headaches described above? Some employers envision allowing her to use her share of company dividends to repay the loan. How is this any different than giving her stock in the first place—you’re paying yourself back for helping her buy some of your stock by reducing the dividends you would otherwise have been entitled to? That’s quite a partnership!
There’s gotta be a better way! Next time: Approach #3.
Tags: phantom stock, sharing stock, stock options
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation | No Comments »