Building Unified Financial Visions

Ken Gibson
February 20th, 2012 by Ken Gibson

What Deserves to be Rewarded?

Every CEO or business owner has a unique set of  performance factors he or she wants executed which are considered crucial to the achievement of the company’s  growth goals.  However, in my view, more importantly there are  categories of outcomes that every company should have as a  focus regardless of their industry, size or niche.  Most specific key performance indicators that company leaders identify as a priority fall under one of those categories.  By defining  those areas of focus–and communicating (through pay systems and otherwise) why they are so critical to the future of the company–business leaders are better able to engineer rewards programs that will drive the outcomes they are seeking, and build a greater ownership mindset among those responsible for producing those results.

Conversely, if those areas of focus are not clearly defined, employees end up participating in a rewards plan that has little or no context.  They see it as a mechanism for increasing their compensation, but that’s all.  It might even  pay well, but the company will ultimately be frustrated with the results it is realizing if employees can’t connect their rewards to a broader fulfillment that is  being achieved.

Here’s what I mean by defining areas of focus within which individual compensation metrics, measures and plans can be constructed:

  • We reward innovation. Creativity and ingenuity are critical to our growth and so we are willing to share value with those whose innovations leverage our ability to multiply value for all stakeholders.
  • We reward sustained performance. Our growth depends upon the ability of the company to maintain then expand the virtuous cycles connected to our business model. Therefore, we share value with those that help us sustain and improve our revenue producing “engine.”
  • We reward  ”good” profits. Good profits come by delivering real value to the market place and protecting customer or client interests at all levels of interaction.  Bad profits are those that come at the expense of the customer or client relationship and experience or erode owner interests over time. We will share value with those who help create and grow good profits.

The list could go on but hopefully you get the idea. Unless employees are aware of these definitive priorities and outcomes they could technically qualify for a payout under an incentive plan without ever taking stewardship of key results the business needs them to perpetuate.  In the worst case, those same employees could pull the company in a direction that is at odds with the strategic direction it has charted (generating bad profits instead of good profits, for example).

So, as you examine your current pay practices, ask whether your rewards programs help define and fulfill the broader areas of focus your company needs to reinforce if its growth expectations are going to be realized.  If they don’t, you should consider making some serious changes.

Tom Miller
February 10th, 2012 by Tom Miller

The Rewards Pyramid–Checking on Alignment

How well do your employees understand the connection between your organization’s goals and their pay? Here’s an easy way to find out.

Ask them, one-by-one, to respond to four simple questions:

1. Where do you see the company headed?

2. What do you think are the essential things that must happen to achieve our best results?

3. What contribution do you expect to make to our success?

4. What do you personally hope to achieve or receive as a result?

These might be called the vision, strategy, contribution and rewards questions. I sometimes refer to them as the Rewards Pyramid.

There are lots of things to learn from this exercise, such as (a) how well do the employees’ responses align with the official vision and mission of the organization? (b) what role do they see themselves playing (if any) in the company’s success? and (c) what personal rewards are most important to them (money, position, opportunity)?

Without alignment, organizations simply don’t move forward. On the other had, when employees buy into a compelling vision, believe it can be achieved, see a growing role for themselves in it, and believe they will be rewarded fairly, you have an organization on track for success.

Tom Miller
February 8th, 2012 by Tom Miller

Should You Pay the Way Alaska Airlines Does?

A recent Wall Street Journal article (subscription may be required) highlighted the recent successes of Alaska Airlines—a standout in the struggling airline industry. The article, reflecting an interview with Alaska CEO Bill Ayer, stressed the steps the company has taken to grow value.

The part of the article I’d like to draw attention to relates to the way Ayer has reshaped the compensation philosophy and approach of the airline. I’ve selected one quote (broken into four statements) from the article and added my parenthetical observations. The article quote is in italics. My comments follow each sentence.

As part of its restructuring, Alaska put all staff in the bonus pool. (This is the first strong practice. Don’t limit your bonus plans to managers and supervisors. Get everyone on board.)

Bonuses are based on earnings (70%) and customer satisfaction, cost discipline and safety record (10% each). (Overall, a sound practice. Employees can clearly see what they can do to impact these indicators. I like the emphasis on earnings because it unites employees around the lifeblood of the business. They’ll need to be careful they don’t encourage employees to manipulate behavior just to earn the bonus. This could be counter-productive. As long as they’re careful, they’ve discovered a great formula.)

Each month, the company tells every sales agent or flight attendant how well the company is doing in the bonus categories. (This is rare. And it’s the key to the success of the plan. Few companies devote the time and effort needed to make the bonus plan work. Regular and ongoing communication is the most important step to take.)

We say we want to share generously during really good times, rather than lock in really high wages all the time, says Mr. Ayer. (Several positive things here. First, I like the term “share.” It suggests a partnership relationship. Secondly, the emphasis on modest fixed wages and generous variable bonuses is helpful to prevent high costs in tough times while encouraging meaningful upside during good times. Finally,
note the phrase, “we want to share generously.” The board and leaders have adopted the view that the more they pay the better off everyone will be.

Ayer has captured the essence of how a company can adopt a value sharing philosophy that emphasizes a true partnership relationship with employees. I’m not surprised Alaska Airlines is at or near the top of nearly every industry metric—and that their stock price rose 30% in 2011 while competitors were entering bankruptcy.

How you pay matters!

 

Tom Miller
February 2nd, 2012 by Tom Miller

Don’t Get Stuck Like Facebook Did

By now everyone’s aware that Facebook is preparing to launch its IPO—probably the biggest one ever. Founder Mark Zuckerberg has tried to keep the company private for as long as possible—presumably to preserve its nimbleness.

So why go public now? Obviously there are probably a lot of reasons. But one relates to the complexities of stock-based compensation. In the early stages of Facebook a number of employees received stock options, some of which have been converted to stock. But stock is worthless unless it can be converted to cash. This article summarizes the issue well. And here’s the pertinent quote:

“In 2010, Facebook banned employees from selling their stock, citing legal concerns around insider-trading rules. So, in an odd twist, the only way for early employees to cash out their vested stock options has been to leave the company.”  (Emphasis mine)

Employers are constantly doing this to themselves by not structuring their long-term incentive plans (be they equity or phantom) in the right way. You always want to enable employees to harvest the cash value of their LTIPs.

Phantom stock plans, for example, should have designated pay-out dates and should vest upon other timing events other than separation of employment. LTIPs are an essential part of any balanced compensation strategy. But do it right. Give employees the ability to extract the value from the plan before you discover that the plan is defeating the very purpose for which it was designed–retaining and rewarding premier talent.

Ken Gibson
January 31st, 2012 by Ken Gibson

Why Long-Term ‘Value Sharing’ Matters

The following post is an excerpt from a White Paper (with the same title) that VisionLink recently published.  To access the full article, click here.

Value sharing is an issue that, sooner or later, every enterprise leader must confront.  For example, many responsible for driving business growth wonder whether some kind of long-term incentive will enable higher performance; and if so, which approach is best—stock, performance units, phantom equity or some other value sharing plan.  This article offers five compelling reasons why long-term value sharing is critical for any company seeking breakthrough growth.

It is not the intent of this article to make a judgment about which long-term plan is most effective or to describe the advantages and disadvantages of different value sharing approaches.  Instead, we want to consider why such plans matter and how they make companies more productive while multiplying wealth for all stakeholders.

With that understanding as a “jumping off point,” let’s now move on to why long-term value sharing matters.

#1: Value Sharing Attracts the Best Talent and Magnifies Results

To achieve sustained success, companies must attract and keep talented people that know how to compete and are willing and able to assume a stewardship role in representing shareholder interests towards growth.  For such a relationship to be properly fostered, owners and other stakeholders (in this case, key talent) must share both the risks and the rewards associated with value creation.

Those of superior talent are attracted to this idea.  Individuals best equipped to contribute to the future success of the business will see it as an opportunity to have what amounts to a mini-entrepreneurial experience within the construct of someone else’s business model.  As such, they view the company as a mechanism for wealth creation, not just a place to express their passion and talent.  And shareholders should want employees with that perspective representing their interests.

#2: Effectively designed long-term value sharing plans reinforce the company’s business model

A sustainable business model depends, in large part, on a culture that is committed to and, ideally, “invested in” that model’s reinforcement and success. As a result, having key members of a workforce aligned financially with the business model makes both common and strategic sense.  The importance of this concept stems from the nature of the virtuous cycles (revenue perpetuation) the model is intended to produce.

Four Seasons, Verizon and Amazon each have distinct business models and, by extension, unique virtuous cycles.  So, it only stands to reason that their compensation strategies will be equally distinct.  The metrics and measures that stand as gate keepers to payouts (or earned shares, as the case may be) in each organization must reflect and reinforce the virtuous cycles relevant to that business.

# 3: Value Sharing Protects against Bad Profits and Promotes Good Profits

In his book The Ultimate Question, Fred Reichheld, a Bain Fellow and founder of Bain & Company’s Loyalty Practice, offers the following on the subject of profits:

“Whenever a customer feels misled, mistreated, ignored, or coerced, then profits from that customer are bad…Bad profits are about extracting value from customers, not creating value.” (The Ultimate Question, Fred Reichheld, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2006, 3-4.)

Long-term value sharing arrangements, if designed properly, become a self-enforcing means of perpetuating good profits.  Everyone has an interest in good profits if everyone’s wealth multiplier rises or falls on the ability of the company to sustain the right kind of profitability.

#4: Long-term value sharing promotes an ownership mindset

Businesses need employees in leadership roles that understand “what’s important.”  Such individuals must be able to embrace a stewardship role in aligning their focus with that of shareholders. They need to define what’s important in the same terms as ownership when they go about fulfilling their responsibilities.  For most companies, a list of “what’s important” would include, but not be limited to, the following:

  • Drive growth (revenue, net income, EBIDTA or other measures)
  • Improve margins/profits
  • Manage costs

Each of those areas of emphasis has long-term implications.  In that context, value sharing plays a key role in communicating “what’s important” and aligns key producers with ownership thinking.

#5: Value Sharing Builds Trust and Trust Accelerates Results

At its core, value sharing is about turning a company’s workforce into partners in building the future company.  A culture of confidence is rooted in an environment of trust.  Value sharing communicates and builds trust because, in part, it is a fair approach to rewarding those responsible for value creation—and trust is the key to accelerating results.  In his book The Speed of Trust, author Stephen M. R. Covey makes the case this way:

“Whether it’s high or low, trust is the “hidden variable” in the formula for organizational success.

“ …A company can have an excellent strategy and a strong ability to execute; but the net result can be torpedoed by a low-trust tax or multiplied by a high-trust dividend.  This makes a powerful business case for trust, assuring that it is not a soft, ‘nice to have’ quality.”  (The Speed of Trust, Stephen M. R. Covey, Free Press, February 2008)

When you pay people in a way that communicates you want them as partners in building the future business, you are, in essence, saying: “I have confidence in you and trust your ability to get results.  To prove it, I’m willing to share the value you help create.”

Start with a Clear Philosophy

Before considering which plan is “right,” wise leaders will begin with the development of a compensation philosophy that addresses how the company will nurture a culture of confidence through its approach to rewards. Such a philosophy should address the balance the company will maintain between short and long-term value sharing, and guaranteed versus at risk compensation.  Determining the plan that will best reflect that philosophy then becomes much easier.

 

Tom Miller
January 10th, 2012 by Tom Miller

Communicating Your Bonus Plan–the Right Way

How much financial detail should you provide employees about your bonus/incentive plan? We’ve always preached that for any incentive plan to be effective it needs to be (a) clear, (b) believable, and (c) meaningful.

Clarity relates to both (1) the plan itself, and (2) the results needed to earn the award and to maximize it. Most owners of private
companies are reluctant to disclose specific information about company profit results for fear that employees will misinterpret the information (i.e., conclude that this must be what the owner makes) or under-appreciate it (i.e., fail to realize that profits are the sustaining lifeblood of the organization).

Recently, a relatively new client of ours took the leap and fully disclosed to all employees exactly what the company profit-related goals are. Their new bonus plan is properly referred to as a “value sharing plan.” They explained to employees that the organization creates economic value when everyone works together as a team to achieve desired business results. And when those results are created everyone is eligible to participate in the sharing of that value.

(This is a progressive step forward. The terms “bonus” and “incentive” seem a little dated, don’t they?)

Time will tell how this impacts performance within this organization. I’m betting on continued productivity gains and  improvements. Being honest with employees about what business results are expected and enlisting their partnership efforts in achieving them is a critical step in accelerating business results to the next level.

Tom Miller
December 19th, 2011 by Tom Miller

Value Sharing: The Right Way to Pay

Why do you choose to pay bonuses? What do your employees understand as the reasons you pay them?

Many employers pay bonuses at the end of the year because: (a) everyone else does, (b) they’ve always done it, (c) they had a “good year” or (d) it’s a reasonable away to reflect good employee performance. Borrrring!

Having designed many plans I’ve come to learn that, while there may be legitimate secondary reasons, there should only be one primary reason for paying bonuses: employees created value and they deserve to participate in that value.

Thus, the first question a business should ask before implementing a bonus plan is, “How do we define value creation?” The answer to this fundamental question will reveal a lot about how the business model supports the strategic goals of the owners. Do we value sales (new business development)? Do we value new product development? Do we value customer service? What is important to us? What will lead to sustainable profitability? What will give us a true competitive advantage?

Once identified, these value creation principles can be easily explained to employees. Employees can then be taught that the company produces profits when specific goals related to these objectives are achieved. And these results, in turn, produce profits for the shareholders. Finally, shareholders are committed to sharing some of those profits with employees in a meaningful way.

This doesn’t mean that the incentive plan has to be explained as a pure profit sharing arrangement. But employees need to understand that bonuses don’t grow on trees. Profits are the foundation upon which meaningful bonuses can be built.

No matter how you formally structure your bonus plan, be sure to explain to employees that those who learn to contribute to true value sharing (however you define it) will be entitled to receive the highest awards.

Refining this process will lead to higher productivity via more engaged employees.

Tom Miller
December 9th, 2011 by Tom Miller

Final Thoughts: Perfecting the Phantom Stock Plan

If you’ve hung in with me the past couple of months you know I’ve sung the praises of phantom stock for private companies. If you’re new here you can start the series here.

Today, some final thoughts (or final for now, anyway).

Phantom stock plans can be, without a doubt, one of the most important steps you ever take in assembling the team of people who will take your company to new heights. However, there’s something more important that getting the right structure. You need to create the right mindset.

If you create a “perfect” plan but don’t establish the right mindset your plan will flop. You’ll wonder what went wrong with the plan. But it won’t be the plan’s fault. It will be yours. Ultimately, it’s your job to see that the employees not only understand the plan but that they are inspired by it.

Mindset relates to the perception of the plan in the minds of participants. When you make Sally a participant in this plan she should feel like she was just made a partner in the company. She should understand that her financial future is tied to yours (and vice versa). She should realize that you trust her to help produce the results that will create value for both of you.

Always position the plan in a positive light. Explore and discover ways to make your plan one of the highlights of your relationship with your key people. You’re investing in them. Make sure they know how much you value their efforts and how much you trust them to generate great results. Your phantom stock plan is a symbol of your commitment to a partnership relationship. They aren’t getting actual stock but they don’t really want those headaches anyway. They want to know that they have a chance to participate in the value they help create. A phantom stock plan, properly designed, can do just that because it sends the right message about the future:

We’re building a great company.

We’ve got the right people.

We’re united as partners in our financial success.

Let’s go make it happen.

If you’d like a copy of the complete series, click here.

Ken Gibson
November 21st, 2011 by Ken Gibson

Keep Incentive Plan Design Simple

Complexity can kill any value sharing arrangement.  Some reading that sentence are nodding their heads knowingly right now.  They’ve experienced that complexity and watched failure overcome what seemed in the beginning like just the right solution to plan design.

Companies run into the complexity problem most commonly when they try to manage behavior through the incentive plan.  They construct metrics and measures that are intended to focus the employee on specific business drivers.  By the time they construct those metrics for every category and tier in the company, they have a monster on their hands.  It’s usually about that time that our phone rings.

As you approach incentive plan design, keeping it simple has to be an overarching aim that guides the process.  To accomplish this, think in terms of deciding between two basic plan types and three basic measurement categories.  Then plan to “weight” the measurement categories by tier of employee to address the variance in impact at each level of the workforce.  Here’s what I mean.

Two Plan Types

When building a short-term incentive, a company will need to decide whether they want to use a profit-based allocation model or a targeted KPI approach.   In simple terms, a profit-based approach will focus everyone in the workforce on the profitability of the company and a pool will be used to generate payouts once a certain threshhold of profitability is achieved.  The KPI approach focuses the attention of an individual or team on defined performance indicators or intiatives which, if achieved, will drive greater profitability, revenue, EBITDA or whatever other key outcome you measure.

Each of these approaches are discussed more thoroughly in an article and/or webinar on our website.  I will refer you there for greater detail.

Three Measurement Categories

Most plan types can be managed well by “weighting” how much of an incentive will be tied to company performance, how much to team or department performance and how much should be based on individual performance.  The weighting each of these is given depends on the sphere of influence of the participating employee.  For example, tier one employees (executive level) might have a weighting something like the following: 75% company, 0% team, 25% individual.  A second tier (directors) might be allocated as follows: 25% company, 50% team, 25% individual. And so on through the tiers.

The three measurements approach allows you to have one plan while making room for adjustments to be made by category of employee based on its ability to impact company, department or individual outcomes.

Long-Term Incentives

Just a word about long-term value sharing.  The approach described above can apply to LTIPs as well, but is most commonly used for short-term incentive plan design (payouts for performance in a period of 12 months or less).  To effectively design a long-term value sharing arrangement, you will need an additional planning tool; a decision tree process that helps you ask the right questions and arrive at a suitable plan model. Ultimately, there are about nine different long-term value sharing approaches you could adopt.  Questions such as “are you willing to share equity?” lead to one conclusion or another about which plan type will be most suitable for your organization. To learn more about the decision tree process access the VisionLink article entitled: “Long-Term Incentive Plans–Which is Right for your Company?”

Once a long-term plan design is determined, a “simple” approach should still be applied.  The three measurement categories approach will help you do that.

In the world of compensation design, as in so many other things, “less” is often “more.”  Keep it simple.

 

Tom Miller
November 21st, 2011 by Tom Miller

Avoid These 9 Pitfalls with Your Phantom Stock Plan

This is actually my 11th blog on doing phantom stock right. If you haven’t followed the series you may want to start here.

For those who’ve hung out until the end…or the near end, congrats.

You now are armed with all you need to build a phantom stock plan. But if you’re trying this on your own, make sure you avoid some of the pitfalls.

As with any rewards strategy, there are plans that work well and others that fail.  To ensure your approach to Phantom Stock has a greater chance of success, here are some “do’s and don’ts” to consider.

  1. Don’t do one-time grants. Schedule and award grants annually. Make each grant a celebration. One-time grants always lead to regrets (e.g., “I shouldn’t have given him so many.”)
  2. If you’re not sure which type to use, go with phantom options. There’s less risk. No increase in value results in no payments to employees. Even if your share price goes down in some years employees can still come out ok (as long as you’re doing annual grants—see #1).
  3. That said, consider some full value grants for the key long-term employees who’ve been with you “through thick-and-thin.” This will give them some starting credit for prior contributions. Perhaps you’ll just do this in the first plan year, and then include them in your annual option awards. (This could be done for as few as one employee.)
  4. Start with a small group and expand participation as time goes by. It’s always easier to add participants than to subtract.
  5. Schedule payouts every five to six years. (Sooner is ok, but longer is not.)  Unlike regular stock options and restricted
    stock, employees cannot (with some exceptions) choose when they’ll “exercise” or “redeem” their shares. You, the plan sponsor, decide. The temptation will be to push the payment date out too long. This has two negative results: (a) the
    value may compound for a long time resulting in very large payouts, and (b) employees will have no way to access their money unless they quit—not the ideal scenario.
  6. Don’t make your formula (for share price calculation) too complicated. We’ve seen plans where the company officers don’t even understand the formula (or can’t remember why some things were included). Keep it simple. “Hey gang, if we grow profits we all make money!”
  7. Don’t ignore the rules. Most phantom stock plans will be subject to ERISA (the Fed’s 1974 rules on pensions) and Internal Revenue Code Section 409A. Sorry. There are rules. Fail to know and follow them at your own peril.
  8. Don’t try this at home. Get advice. It’s risky to decide upon the best choices for a phantom stock plan without the guidance of someone who’s done it before, a lot. You may intend to give away 10% of the growth of your company to your employees and you wind up giving away 30% via bad design and operation. This is important. Get help.
  9. That said, don’t use your attorney as your principal advisor. Your lawyer will be needed in the process—towards the end—to make sure the documents are in order. But, your attorney will not be experienced at the realities of plan operation. Find someone who’s lived with, slept with and eaten with phantom stock over the years. Let them put the structure on your important decisions. Then use your attorney to “cross the t’s and dot the i’s.”

Watch next time for my last tips on how to make a phantom stock plan inspire your employees.

10.  Manage the plan effectively. Don’t start the plan
and forget about it. Keep it fresh. Be flexible. Communicate it. Give the
employees statements that show their value. This is a big investment. Use it
wisely.