Building Unified Financial Visions

Ken Gibson
February 4th, 2011 by Ken Gibson

Are Your Employees as Good as they Think They Are?

The answer is yes…and no.  Some interesting research outlined in two recently published books offers evidence that key talent might not be so great were it not for the environment and resources offered by the company for whom they work.

In their book Clever, authors Rob Goffee and Gareth Jones make the point that talented people are as dependent upon the organizations in which they work as those entities are on them.  Their premise is that while premier people are not easily replaced in an organization, those individuals often fail to recognize that it is the company’s resources–other team members, intellectual capital, research access, etc.–that allows them to perform at the level they are and to find the fulfillment they enjoy.

In his book Chasing Stars, The Myth of Talent and the Portability of Performance, Boris Groysberg embellishes on this point with even more detailed research.  His findings indicate that performance is not as portable as individual talent sometimes thinks and a key employee’s results often sharply diminish when he or she  leaves the business for “greener pastures.”

Therefore what?  What influence should such findings have on the way companies approach their rewards systems?

I believe these findings support the VisionLink premise that all good compensation strategies should address the two, interdependent visions that exist within every business.  There is an ownership vision and an employee vision.  Because both have to be realized for the company to experience sustained success, high performing companies develop compensation strategies that build a sense of partnership with employees.  These organizations have a philosophy statement that indicates how value that is created in the organization will be shared and what balance will be struck between guaranteed and at risk pay, and short-term versus long-term incentives.  Specific plans growing out of such an environment reinforce the interplay between talent, resources and results, and tie rewards to appropriate outcomes that can’t be achieved solely through individual performance.

For more information on how to address the question posed here from a compensation perspective, tune into our upcoming webinar entitled, “How to Build Long-Term Value for Key Producers.”  The webinar will be broadcast on February 22.  Click here to enroll.

Ken Gibson
January 5th, 2011 by Ken Gibson

Avoiding the Most Common Compensation Mistakes

As a follow up to the blog I posted at the end of last year, I would like to offer some hints for avoiding costly mistakes in your compensation planning for 2011.  This post is intended to “fill in the blanks” on the three imperatives I introduced in my last writing.

Over the course of our careers, my partners and I have been in literally hundreds of businesses. Through that combined experience, we have seen much that is good–but probably more that, well…isn’t.   Here’s what we’ve learned you must do to avoid the eight most common mistakes businesses make when developing pay strategies.

  1. Have a Clear Plan Purpose.  The question that should be asked before you engineer any new compensation strategy is: “How can we ensure a plan design that will positively contribute to the fulfillment of our company’s vision and strategic plan?”  The mistake to be avoided here is having no strategic context for your plan.
  2. Create a Well-Defined Plan Blueprint and Tested Financial Model.  Once you are ready to begin the construction of a new plan design, you should ask the following question: “What will ensure the plan will properly address all financial and legal considerations without forfeiting creativity and innovation?”  The mistake to be avoided here is a lack of creative value in your plan and untested or measured outcomes.
  3. Have a Celebratory Plan Launch.  When you get ready to roll out your new plan, be sure you are able to answer this question: “How can we know that the plan rollout reinforces the company vision while building participant confidence and enthusiasm?” Here, the mistake to be avoided is a lack of employee enthusiasm and buy-in as well as having no context for the plan.
  4. Define a Clear Operations Strategy.  Once a plan has been introduced, the first of five new issues to be addressed evokes this question: “What roles and procedures have to be defined and communicated to ensure effective internal communication and administration of the plan?”  Here you are seeking to avoid the mistake of an unnecessary or unanticipated burden on the company’s administrative team.
  5. Institute an Effective Plan Communications and Marketing Strategy.   This is the second of the five post-rollout issues that have to be addressed. At this stage, the question to be answered is: “What can be done to ensure meaningful, ongoing communication of the value of the plan to all participants?”  The mistake to be avoided by answering that question is disenchanted employees.
  6. Develop a Compliance Plan.  This is number three on our post-rollout “to do” list and the question that needs to be answered is:  “How can we be sure that we are fulfilling all legal and regulatory responsibilities for the plan?”  The obvious mistake to be avoided by addressing this issue is running afoul of regulatory requirements that can lead to stiff penalties or worse.
  7. Have Consistent Financial Oversight of the Plan. This is our fourth post-rollout imperative and it is set up by answering the following question: “How will we ensure the plan is being managed financially and is producing an appropriate return on our investment?”  Here, the company is hoping to avoid the mistake of having no real measure of its return on human capital or its compensation investment.
  8. Measure Line of Sight Consistently and Frequently.  This is the last of the issues to be addressed once a plan has been launched and leads to one of the most important questions of all: “How will we be sure to keep the plan in line with the evolution of the company vision and business strategy?”  With this final step, you are trying to avoid the mistake of having the plan move off course and lose its relevance and impact.

So, there you have it.  A sure way to avoid the pitfalls too many fall into.  Easier said than done?  Of course–but achievable. 

To learn more about these eight steps, consider tuning into our webinar broadcast later this month.  It will address this topic in detail in a one hour session on January 25.  Click here to register now for this event.

The most recent edition of the Harvard Business Review carries an article that I recommend, particularly at a time most companies are engaged in planning and budgeting for the new year.  Authored by Robert Simons, it is entitled Stress-Test Your Strategy and it poses seven searing questions companies should ask themselves to home in on critical issues to address in this or any economy:

  1. Who is your primary customer?
  2. How do your core values prioritize shareholders, employees and customers?
  3. What critical performance variables are you tracking?
  4. What strategic boundaries have you set?
  5. How are you generating creative tension?
  6. How committed are your employees to helping each other?
  7. What strategic uncertainties keep you awake at night?

The article points out that a stress test is an assessment of how a system functions under severe or unexpected pressure.  Mr. Simons points out, “By asking tough questions about your business, you can identify confusion, inefficiency, and weaknesses in your strategy and its implementation. As Peter Drucker once warned, ‘The most serious mistakes are not made as a result of wrong answers. The truly dangerous thing is asking the wrong questions.’ ”

With that in mind, I would pose one additional question as a capstone to those listed above:

Do your current rewards strategies effectively communicate to your key people what you want to have happen in each of those seven areas?

If your answer to that question is no, there is important work to do.  I’ve linked two of the questions above to articles and webinars we have recently published that will help you think through how to tie these issues together.

Commit to making 2011 the year you get compensation right and you will create a more unified, passionate and engaged workforce.

Ken Gibson
October 29th, 2010 by Ken Gibson

A Cadre of Consumate & Generous Professionals

I lead a management society group that puts on a special conference once a year in the Fall.  Entitled, “The Performance Breakthrough Conference,” this event features a keynote speaker followed by a series of breakout sessions on a range of topics, all led by a cadre of outstanding business professionals.  The event relies on the generosity of some in the business community to donate their time on behalf of people looking for tools, resources and/or inspiration to reach the next performance “breakthrough” in their lives, personally or professionally.

This year’s event was held last month.  It was an extraordinary success primarily because of the efforts of our outstanding presenters, each of whom is a consummate professional with significant value to offer.  As an acknowledgment of their contribution to this year’s conference, I’d like you to be aware of them and their businesses, each of whom I can recommend.

Kevin Hall was our keynote speaker.  Kevin is a business coach and wordsmith that has authored an incredible book entitled Aspire.  The book talks about the power of words to transform our lives and understand our true purpose.  Kevin is a nationally renowned speaker who also coaches executives and other leaders on purpose related issues.

Molly Wendell is President of Executives Network, a unique association for “C” level executives in transition.  Molly helped attendees learn about what “Results Oriented” networking is about and how it’s done effectively.  Check out Molly’s website for information on her book, The New Job Search.

Jason Lavin is CEO of Golden Communications, a firm that does web design, search engine optimization and social networking strategies.  Jason also conducts a seminar series entitled Excel-Your-Business, which helps business leaders learn how to optimize the results they are getting from their websites through search optimization strategies and techniques.  He shared that same information with attendees at our conference.

Rod McDermott is co-founder and Managing Partner of McDermott and Bull, an executive search firm headquartered in Irvine, CA.  Rod helped attendees understand how they can best prepare for the “next” career opportunity they are seeking, whether that is finding a job or upgrading their position.  Most of McDermott and Bull’s work is done representing companies that are looking for premier “C” level talent.

Mark Kohler is a partner in the law firm Kyler, Kohler, Ostermiller and Sorenson, a business and estate planning law firm.  Mark is an attorney and CPA with dynamic presentation skills and an unique ability to help navigate complex legal and tax issues, and develop effective strategies for both.  He is an outstanding speaker in high demand.  He helped attendees learn about the issues they should consider when starting a new business.

Kate Peters is a vocal coach that teaches “C” level executives how to become more powerful communicators by understanding vocal dynamics and how they impact one’s image and message.  She helped attendees learn how to “find their voice” and make it heard more effectively in all of the forums where communication is essential.  Check out Kate’s website for information on her book, Can You Hear Me Now?

Please take a moment to pursue the links to these outstanding professionals.  My thanks goes out to each of them for their contribution to our conference and their generosity in sharing their time and talents.

Ken Gibson
August 11th, 2010 by Ken Gibson

Compensation as a “Carrier”

Jack Welch once said: “If you pick the right people and give them the opportunity to spread their wings and put compensation as a carrier behind it you almost don’t have to manage them.”

What did he mean?

Well, I certainly don’t claim any cosmic ability to “channel” Jack Welch.  That said, I think some assumptions can be made about the point he is trying to make.  He means that when you effectively link the roles and expectations of good people to the company’s business plan, compensation–when properly engineered–naturally becomes a key driver of results.  “As a carrier” means this occurs through an unforced yet  strategic process of alignment.  When that happens, a stewardship culture emerges; one in which your best talent takes ownership of outcomes.  This occurs because your people feel like partners in the company’s success; they helped create growth and the compensation system subsequently rewarded them for it.  

This concept is completely consistent with VisionLink’s view of incentives.  They are not tools of manipulation, rather key ingredients of a unified financial vision for growing the business.  They unleash rather than suppress the intrinsic motivators we all possess.

To ensure that your compensation becomes a “carrier,” the following five things must consistent occur once you have created then launched a specific pay program:

  1. Communicate and Promote–don’t assume the plan is understood and remembered. Remind, celebrate, explain and reinforce.
  2. Administer Effectively–so people feel they have ready access to information and it’s clear from whom it can be obtained.
  3. Stay Compliant–so there are no legal or financial surprises for either the participants or the company, especially where ERISA, IRS or other statutory guidelines apply.
  4. Model and Monitor–anticipate ahead of time what the financial commitment will be and then consistently measure actual results against targets; then adjust the plan accordingly.
  5. Measure ”Line of Sight”–so you know whether you’re creating effective links between vision, strategy, roles, expectations and pay.

Follow this pattern and you are on your way to a world-class approach to compensation that is a true “carrier.”

Every business wants the best–the best product, the best customer service, the best possible profit margin, the best market position, and the best people.  Some actually achieve it.  How do they do it? 

From VisionLink’s point of view, there are four  essentials that a company must get right if it hopes to attract and retain a level of talent that can drive all the other “bests” it is trying to achieve.  We call these the Four Pillars of Total Rewards.  In summary, they are as follows:

  • Compelling Future
  • Positive Work Environment
  • Opportunities for Personal and Professional Development
  • Financial Rewards

 

Compelling Future

A compelling future assumes, of course, that those in company leadership know where the business is headed and how its going to get there. They have a vivid and clear vision.  They consistently communicate that vision and the strategy that is needed to fulfill it.  They have reduced the business plan of the company to an easily understood, focused strategy statement that all of the principal players in the company can articulate.   Everyone throughout the organization understands the vision and how the company is going to fulfill it. 

But this is not all.

The “best” companies have an ability to make “compelling future” come alive for their workforce.  They enable their employees to see themselves in the future of the business.   The company and its employees have a shared value system.  There is a unified financial vision for growing the enterprise that is understood by all.  Premier talent are allowed to think and believe that the business cannot achieve its vision without them.  They are allowed this view this because its an accurate one–not just something leadership says to rally the troops.  As a result, they nuture a partnership relationship with employees–particularly key producers.  Those the company needs to drive results see their unique ability as an essential ingredient to the company realizing its vision of the future.  In essence, this is why employees consider the future to be “compelling.”

Positive Work Environment

World class organizations create a culture and environment that nutures individual unique abilities within the framework of unique teams.  This means that people are placed in roles where their talent, experience, skill and wisdom allow them make the best contribution.  Their distinctive ability blends with and compliments others in their sphere of influence to create a highly productive outcome for the company and an enriching experience for the employees. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts.

In such an environment, innovation is encouraged and thrives.  There are open channels of communication for problem solving with company leadership and people feel empowered as stewards over their work.  Roles and expectations are clear, fair and synchronized with the company’s business plan.  A culture of execution, sustained success and confidence is nurtured, celebrated and rewarded.

Opportunities for Personal and Professional Development

Central to the definition of ”meaningful work” for employees is the ability they have to improve and advance.  Organizations that want to attract “the best” must make sure there are clear opportunities for employees to magnify their unique abilities as a result of their affiliation with the company.  This relates to everything from career path development to training and supplemental educational opportunities.  However, it also relates to challenges employees are given, a sense of stewardship they are allowed to have in their roles and the feeling of confidence that is communicated to them about their ability to make a contribution. 

 At its core, this category has to do with building trust.  The roles employees are given, how they are managed, and the way they are ultimately paid ties them to the business plan of the company and creates a sense of collaboration with ownership.  Such a relationship breeds mutual respect and unity, which are foundational to a relationship of trust.  In organizations where trust is high, results are accelerated.  As the speed of performance increases, costs go down and revenues increase.  If compensation is effectively engineered, all win and a positive, self-sustaining momentum is set in motion.

Financial Rewards

Many assume pay is the core issue for employees in determining whether to join or leave an organization.  It’s not that simple.  All of the factors described here play a role. 

At issue with pay is not usually how much someone is getting but how they are being compensated.  In other words, the best employees recognize and respond to the concept of valuation creation.  If a business creates value for its customers, the marketplace rewards that company financially by buying its product or service.  Value is received for value created.  Similarly,  employees recognize that if they create superior value, some part of their pay should reflect that.  Conversely, if they don’t create additional value, they likewise shouldn’t be paid as if they did.

Great organizations understand that value creation has both a short-term and a long-term component– for employees as well as for the company.  The business is interested in generating results today, tomorrow and through the remainder of the year. However, it is also interested in sustained results–those that will drive shareholder value over the next two to five years–even the next decade.  Consequently, they are interested in  good profits (those that come by virtue of benefiting the customer)  and not bad profits (those that come at the expense of the customer and erode good will and long-term business value).

Employees are no different .  They have short and long-term financial objectives–and look to their employment as the primary vehicle to achieve both.  In this context, employees are primarilly interested in their pay program addressing three key priorities:

  • Cash Needs/Standard of Living–this priority is typically met through salary and some type of annual incentive plan that gives the employee some control over short-term earning capacity
  • Security–this area of emphasis has to do with protecting against financial risk through adequate insurance coverage and opportunities for employees to mitigate potential risk issues in their lives
  • Wealth Accumulation–this area of focus has to do with participating in the long-term value employees help the business create and feeling empowered to “reap what they sow”; it goes beyond mechanisms such as 401(k) or pension plans that are purely retirement focused

 

These Four Pillars of a Total Rewards strategy can be a useful way to evaluate how your company is doing in positioning itself to attract the best and, as a result, become the best.  It is our experience that the businesses that “get” this also end up ”getting” the results they are looking for on their pathway towards World-Class Performance.

That is not a VisionLink claim.  It’s the claim of Jean Martin and Conrad Schmidt, both of the Corporate Executive Board’s Corporate Leadership Council in Washington, DC, as reported in their Harvard Business Review article–May 2010 edition.  The claim is based on research done by the Leadership Council in September of 2009.  It’s a staggering statistic.

Following that claim, the authors proceed to delineate the six most common errors their research produced that  contribute to this outcome: 1) Assuming that high potentials are highly engaged; 2)Equating current high performance with future potential; 3)Delegating down the management of top talent; 4) Sheilding rising stars from early derailment; 5) Expecting star employees to share the pain, and; 6) Failing to link your stars to your corporate strategy.

That last mistake (not creating links between key people and strategy) is also the basis for three of the 10 core set of best practices  the article goes on to define for identifying and managing key talent.  It is likewise reflective of the central philosophy VisionLink espouses relative the development of World Class Compensation.  Creating great rewards strategies does not begin with a discussion of compensation.  It begins with a discussion of vision, strategy, roles and expectations.  Rewards should be an extension of that train of thought.

Here are three of the best practices identified in the article, and VisionLink’s observations about each.

  • Create individual development plans; link personal objectives to the company’s plans for growth, rather than to generic competency models.

    VisionLink Observation: Compensation in high performing organizations is one of the tools that forges this link and advances a unified financial vision for growing the business.  Employees will understand this connection (between personal objectives and the company’s growth plans)  if they feel a sense of partnership in their business relationship–financially (through pay) and otherwise.

  • Reevaluate top talent annually for possible changes in ability, engagement, and aspiration levels.

    VisionLink Observation: Performance is not static and pay for performance isn’t either.  A compensation philosophy should clearly define what a company will “pay” for and practices must bring that philosophy to life.  Evaluation tools should be employed at least annually to assess engagement and aspiration levels to determine the level of alignment that is taking place.

  • Offer significantly differentiated compensation and recognition to star employees.

    VisionLink Observation: This is the basis of a pay for performance philosophy and the heart of world-class compensation.  Star companies are fueled by star employees. If the business is performing above the market, premier talent will know that, and will expect to be paid accordingly.  If star performance isn’t being achieved, review the previous bullet point.

As companies begin to emerge from the deep sleep imposed by the recent economic slump, they would do well to make sure they are avoiding the mistakes Jean Martin and Conrad Schmidt have identified.  Equally, they should ensure they are well poised to employ the critical components of a world class talent-development program.

Employers are constantly tinkering with their compensation programs. Are our salaries at market? Couldn’t our bonus plan be better? Are we spending too much on benefits? Notice how each of these questions (and there are lots more like them) focuses on cost and or effectiveness. And effectiveness usually means “does it work for the company?”

After all that effort it’s easy to see why employers are often surprised when an employee quits and takes a job for “more pay” somewhere else.

Employers would be wise to spend a little more time looking at their comp plans through the eyes of their employees. Ultimately, all elements of the total rewards package are evaluated by employees through three lenses: (1) are my cash needs being met? (2) are my security needs being met? (3) do I have a meaningful wealth accumulation opportunity?  (I realize there are other real elements of the total pay program such as PTO, sick pay, etc. But I’m putting those in the “lifestyle support” category. Today I’m talking about the core or largest elements of direct pay–salaries/wages, bonuses, long-term awards, retirement and health and welfare.)

We conduct employee surveys about the perception of the value of pay commitment. I just completed our main survey–the Alignment Appraisal–for three different companies. Here are some of the average employee scores (think 1-10, 10 being the highest).

The company’s cash compensation program effectively meets mypersonal lifestyle needs. (Scores: 4.0,  5.5, 6.2)

The company’s benefit programs (health and welfare plans) offer adequate flexibility and coverage to address the potential financial risks I face. (Scores: 4.0,  8.0,  8.2)

I perceive a meaningful wealth accumulation opportunity through our compensation and rewards programs? (Scores: 3.5,  4.0,  4.9)

Two of these companies obviously do a pretty good job of providing strong health plans. Other than that these scores indicate to me that employees see their rewards programs as average or below when they come to actually meeting their personal needs, goals and expectations. (There are plenty of other responses in the survey that support these conclusions.)  By the way, these scores are very typical. We don’t usually see them much higher.

I consider this a serious problem! The investment in compensation for employees is huge–almost always the biggest expense on the income statement. Why isn’t their greater concern about matching this up with what employees really want and need?

This problem is very often one of perception. But it’s a common one. Right or wrong, employees don’t think employers are really that concerned about their personal financial needs. Think about the implications of this to morale, productivity, retention, recruiting–as well as growth and profits!

One of Stephen Covey’s “7 Habits” was to “seek first to understand, then to be understood.” Employers who learn to look at their total rewards investment (TRI) through the lenses of their employees’ three needs will find that they strengthen the partnership relationship with their employees. In the long run everyone wins–employees utiilize their rewards dollars more productively and shareholders reap the benefit of long-lasting improvements in culture along with  greater profits and real equity value.

Ken Gibson
March 31st, 2010 by Ken Gibson

Strategic not Tactical

One of the biggest mistakes most organizations make is to treat compensation as a tactical, expense management issue.  In some respects, this is a natural inclination.  Compensation is customarily the largest budget item on the company’s financial statements.  As a result, most organizations look at it as a cost to be managed. 

However, high performance companies see everything through a strategic lens, including and especially compensation.  As a result, they see pay as an extension of the company’s business plan, not just a  line item on the income statement.  For such organizations, decision making regarding rewards can’t be and isn’t dealt with in tactical terms.  Every rewards program they roll out has a strategic purpose that is grounded in a well defined compensation philosophy.

Businesses that treat compensation strategically commonly employ the following practices:

  • The CEO  establishes the strategic direction for rewards and drives the priorities surrounding compensation planning and decisions
  • The organization employs mechanisms to measure alignment between workforce performance and practices, and the business plan of the company
  • The company has a compensation committee that meets regularly (preferably quarterly) to make rewards decisions and assess progress of existing strategies based on a written philosophy statement that clearly defines what the company “pays” for
  • The compensation committee employs processes for the consideration, development, implementation and ongoing management of its rewards strategies
  • Specific rewards programs are only implemented once their strategic purpose is clearly stated and their impact on both shareholder and employee wealth accumulation value has been modeled and tested
  • The company establishes a means of measuring the productivity of its people; it isolates the return that comes to the business through financial capital at work versus human capital at work
  • The organization develops a rewards reinforcement strategy and management system  for the ongoing promotion and communication of its compensation plans
  • Shareholders are routinely informed of the relationship between rewards and additional value being created through the execution of an effective and focused workforce.

Such an ideal isn’t achieved overnight.  However, no one achieves it until they buy into the relationship between vision, strategy, roles and expectations, and rewards–and then commits to a process that links those interdependent issues.  Such an approach is only adopted by organizations that want compensation to become a key driver of growth in their business, and not just one more cost that has to be contained.

Ken Gibson
March 12th, 2010 by Ken Gibson

What Does ‘Pay for Performance’ Really Mean?

Certain words and phrases become part of a kind of  business “pop lexicon” as they are used and repeated incessantly over an extended period of time.  When they do, their meaning often becomes diluted.  As that happens, businesses sometimes assume “it must have been a passing fad”–so think they can now ignore the issue.

We fear “Pay for Performance” is in danger of becoming just such a phrase.  So many use it, but so few can tell you what it actually means.  Fewer still employ this philosophy, even when they outwardly espouse it.

We believe any company that wants to achieve World Class Performance must have World Class Compensation. As a result, it must understand and embrace a pay for performance philosophy and plan. Because we believe that, we’d like to tell you what we think it means.

A company is employing a pay for performance strategy if its rewards programs are structured as follows:

  1. The company ties awards to shareholder financial objectives. In a true pay for performance environment, incentives drive value for shareholders and the company is able measure the impact their rewards strategies are having in this regard.
  2. The business employs the right “mix” of compensation elements. Organizations that tie compensation to performance standards understand that how they pay people has a bigger impact on results than how much they pay them–although both are important.  Pay for performance means the company strikes the right balance between guaranteed and at risk compensation, and short-term versus long-term incentives.
  3. Payouts result in meaningful dollars. Employees want to feel a sense of partnership with owners in achieving company goals.  This creates a unified financial vision for growing the business.  Such a unity can only happen when value sharing reaches a threshold that is “meaningful” to employees. In organizations that achieve this, employees are thinking (and hopefully saying) the following: “It’s important to me that the company achieve its goals because what I receive if it does is meaningful to me.”
  4. Performance expectations are tied to factors  employees can impact. It doesn’t matter how much employees have the potential to earn if they don’t feel they can impact the outcome that triggers their award.  In too many cases, what is supposed to be an incentive turns into a credibility problem for the company.  “Sure, you tell me this is my award, but I’m not really in a position to earn it.”
  5. Rewards are consistently communicated, reinforced and celebrated. This is a primary way a partnership mindset is nurtured.  Individual, departmental and company wide achievements are celebrated and employees sense they are participating in something great they helped create.  Sustained success and a culture of confidence grow out of such an approach. 

These guidelines will never go out of style, regardless of the popular lexicon that is in vogue at a given moment in time.