Building Unified Financial Visions

Ken Gibson
July 8th, 2011 by Ken Gibson

CEO Pay is Up! Is that Good?

Such is the question posed in the lead editorial of the July/August 2011 edition of  Harvard Business Review. It comes on the heels of a report by Equilar, an organization that tracks executive compensation, total pay packages for CEOs at S&P 500 companies.  According to its data, CEO pay rose 28% in 2010, to a median of $9 million.  This brings it back to pre-recession levels.

HBR Editor in Chief, Adi Ignatius, offers some interesting observations in response to this report.  Here, in part, is what he says:

“It’s hard to know exactly how to take this news. On the one hand, it’s a positive economic indicator of sorts, in that a CEO’s compensation tends to be linked to the company’s stock price. The markets saw a strong recovery in 2010; the S&P 500 index, for example, rose 13%. On the other hand, there’s something unsettling about this development. In the immediate wake of the financial crisis, nearly everyone agreed that we had gotten into trouble partly because tying compensation to short-term performance had enriched individuals while putting institutions—and the overall system—at risk. In an interview that begins on page 112, Disney CEO Robert Iger addresses the problem. He made $28 million last year in salary, bonus, and stock options. But Iger concedes that there is too much emphasis, in his and other CEOs’ pay packages, on short-term stock results, and he urges compensation committees to rethink their approach.”

I tend to agree with Ignatius’s thinking on this issue.  The 2010 results certainly reveal that executive pay is a kind of double-edged sword in what it reflects.  At a minimum they demonstrate that any executive pay strategy that doesn’t take a balanced approach to compensation (tempering short-term earnings capacity for key people by placing some long-term compensation at risk) can ultimately be considered “unfair” by some constituency.  Public companies have a harder time with this than private organizations, primarily because of the need to focus on quarterly results.  Meeting the expectations of the analysts is almost their sole focus. 

Both public and private companies need a compensation philosophy and strategy that is consistent with building both short and long-term value.  As I have discussed previously in these blog pages, such an approach keeps a business focused on good profits instead of bad profits.  The latter are earnings that come at the ultimate expense of both the customer and shareholders.  Good profits sustain value and multiply wealth for all stakeholders.

In our approach to compensation design, we recommend companies place a substantial amount of executive pay “at risk” through well designed incentives.  We encourage growth oriented-organizations to offer top tier employees as much as 80 to 100% of salary in incentive earning capacity.  The key is to have approximately half of that amount paid out in short-term incentives (pay for results generated in 12 months or less) and the other half in long-term incentives (pay for results generated past the one year mark, and usually three years or more later).  Salaries should be modest by market standards–usually between the 40th and 50th percentile of market pay.

Such an approach creates a truer sense of partnership between company ownership, key employees, customers and the market in general.  When each of those stakeholders’ interests are represented in the way employees are compensated, greater balance is realized and the compensation wars can subside if not be eliminated.

For more information on the role of compensation in driving shareholder value, view our webinar entitled: “Does Your Compensation Strategy Drive or Hinder Growth?”

Ken Gibson
June 29th, 2011 by Ken Gibson

5 Simple Ways to Transform Your Rewards Strategy

It’s summer and we’re all ready for simple solutions to things.  Easy meals to fix. Inexpensive ways to entertain our kids.  Fastest routes out of town for long weekends. And so on.  In that same spirit, here are a few suggestions to simplify your company’s compensation life this season and have significant impact in the process.

  1. Form a Compensation Committee. Include members of the leadership team best positioned to impact decisions related to compensation. Make sure it is headed by the CEO of the company.  Establish as its charter to treat compensation as both an investment that generates a measurable return and a strategic tool that  impacts company growth.  Establish a regular meeting schedule.
  2. Create and Publish a Rewards Philosophy Statement. You don’t have to be able to fulfill the philosophy with concrete programs yet, but it will communicate the direction you plan to go and get you moving in the right direction.  Consider having a philosophy statement that commits the company to being at somewhere between the 40th and 50th percentile in terms of guaranteed compensation (salaries) but perhaps at the 70th percentile or above in total compensation.  In other words, commit to a philosophy that will begin putting a larger amount of compensation at risk.
  3. Innumerate 4 to 5 Results Your Company is Seeking to Realize. These might be divided between short-term (12 months or less) and long-term (over 12 months).  They could be revenue or sales goals, profit or margin targets, new product development, market expansion or any number of key performance factors your company is seeking to improve.  Ask the committee to consider how, if at all, any of the present compensation strategies of the company are reinforcing those results as priorities to employees right now.
  4. Identify the Individuals or Groups Best Positioned to Impact those Results. As you examine that list, begin formulating in your mind the “type” of compensation that will best communicate to employees their role in achieving those results.  Think in terms of how much of their compensation should be tied to those outcomes and how much should be short-term versus long-term.
  5. Make a List of the Obvious Missing Pieces in Your Comp Strategy. The previous four steps should make this apparent.  For example, if you determine one of the key results you are seeking is to double revenue in the next three years, but your compensation package includes only salary and a quarterly bonus, then a long-term incentive plan is an obvious missing component at this stage.

Now, going through this exercise will not (yet) alter your overall rewards approach.  What it will do, however, is transform your thought process. And changing the way you think about pay is the first step in transforming compensation in your organization.

If you can engage in these simple steps over the course of the summer, by the fall you will be positioned to begin developing specific strategies that will bring your rewards philosophy to life and fulfill the results your company seeks to realize.  Compensation will then become a strategic tool helping to drive growth rather than an impediment to the sustained success you desire.

Here’s to a simplified summer.

For more information on this topic, view our webinar broadcast entitled “How Do I Create a Competitive Advantage with Our Compensation Programs.”

CEOs have a lot to worry about.  (Okay, forgive my stating the obvious before even gettng started!)  As a result, effective chief executives provide strategic oversight but empower others to make decisions and carry out the company’s business model and plan.  Ideally, that person has set up accountability systems that are both effective and efficient in their ability to provide relevant feedback to guide him or her in making adjustments and course corrections as necessary. 

I recognize there’s nothing new in that introduction.  However, it’s an important foundation for setting up a discussion about the CEO’s role in compensation development and management.   Here’s why.

The leadership orientation  just described, while typical and necessary, often puts the CEO too far out of touch with an essential role he or she needs to play in the compensation discussion.  Pay is a strategic tool, not merely an expense that needs to be contained.  It is an investment that needs to be properly allocated and the CEO should assume as much responsibility for the return the company achieves on that capital commitment as any that is made in the enterprise.  In fact, given that compensation and benefits are usually the largest budget item on any company’s financial statements, one could argue that the CEO should pay even more attention to ROI results being generated  in this area than almost any other the company measures and manages.

At the end of the day, the person at the helm is primarily  responsible for making sure that both financial and human capital are generating an appropriate return for shareholders–and then holding people accountable for performance levels that will ensure that outcome.

If this is true (and I submit it is), then exactly what role should the CEO play in the compensation discussion–and where (if anywhere) should  handoffs (delegation) occur?  Here are some suggestions and guidelines:

  1. Establishing Pay Philosophy.  A chief executive officer must lead the philosophical discussion about pay.  Given the performance outcomes demanded of that role, the person at the helm must make clear what the company will pay for–and how that philosophy will be manifest in practice.  Where should company salary levels be vis a vis market pay?  What balance should the company strike between guaranteed and at risk pay? How much of performance-based pay (incentives) should reward for short-term results (monthly, quarterly or annual) and how much should be tied to long-term results (more than 12 months)?  Certainly, a CEO can solicit imput from key leadership members in this discussion (as well as outside consultants), but this is a core issue for which he or she must assume primary responsibility.  Every other discussion about pay will cascade from this foundational stage and the groundwork that is laid by establishing a clear pay philosophy.
  2. Defining Strategic Outcomes. Specific pay programs may be developed under the direction of individuals given that stewardship by the CEO.  However, in making that handoff, the person ultimately responsible for the “bottom line” must be able to clearly define the strategic outcomes and priorities the company is focused on.  Every rewards plan that is developed must have a purpose statement–and that purpose must be tied to a specific, measureable result the business seeks to achieve.  What is the role of the pay plan if not to drive the business model and strategy of the company?  CEOs will be left wondering why they aren’t getting better results from their people if they aren’t paying attention to and fully engaged in this part of the process.
  3. Establishing Framework for Discussion.  Compensation development and management is not a static activity.  A company can’t develop a plan, role it out and then “let it ride” forever more (although some companies do, by default, adopt this approach).  As a result, the CEO needs to provide the organizational framework within which best practices for envisioning, creating and sustaining world class compensation strategies can emerge and thrive.  He or she should decide who is essential to the compensation discussion, organize a committee to fulfill the oversight role and (with the help of those committee members) establish a schedule and agenda for ongoing management and monitoring.
  4. Determining Roles and Responsibilities. Related to area number three above, this category implies that those involved with developing a best practice approach to building and sustaining world-class compensation strategies for their company understand their specific stewardships.  For example, who is ultimately responsible for administering a given plan?  Who will take the lead in developing a promotion and communication strategy for the overall rewards strategy?  Who will make sure successes are celebrated appropriately and in a timely fashion?  Who will monitor any legal requirements associated with the plan(s)?  How and under whose direction will the success of given pay programs be measured and monitored?  What financial information, requirements  and procedures have to be tracked and managed–and who will assume that responsibility?  And so on.  The CEO doesn’t have to make everyone of these assignments, but he or she does need to ensure that these roles get defined and that there is accountability for their fulfillment.
  5. Approving Metrics and Measures.  Compensation design is an outcome based endeavor.  In many ways it’s also an exercise in reverse engineering.  We project forward certain results we anticipate achieving based on certain assumptions (revenue growth, expenses, manpower, etc.).  We determine how such growth will impact shareholder value.  We then determine what amount of that additional value we are willing to share to achieve that outcome.  We then “reverse engineer” that future value to a present context so we can clearly state how employees will participate in the value they help create.  In that process, the CEO must help define thresholds of performance (revenue growth, profit margin, ROE, etc.)  that need to be achieved before the company will be comfortable sharing value.  Specific measures and metrics for company wide performance, department or team performance and individual performance will ultimately need to be determined.  While the CEO won’t independently  set the levels in each of these areas, he or she cannot disengage from the decisions that have to be “signed off on” if the plans developed are going to be financially viable and protect shareholders’ interests.
  6. Insisting on a Clear Message.  CEOs set a tone.  They can make or break a meeting or announcement based on the level of attention it receives, the passion that surrounds it and the clarity that is provided.  Likewise, a CEO must ensure that any message involving any aspect of the largest budget item on the company’s financials (compensation and benefits) is clear and helps reinforce the organization’s vision and mission as well as it’s business model and plan.  This doesn’t mean the CEO needs to deliver every message about compensation.  It does mean, however, that he or she knows what messages are being communicated and they are consistent with the compensation philosophy statement that was established and articulated at the start, under the chief executives direction.
  7. Leading the Celebration.  While managers at all levels of a business should help their teams celebrate the successes they experience, the CEO needs to be the cheerleader in chief.  That role carries a weight that can’t be duplicated by others.  When employees hear from the person at the top, there is a different priority level that message attains.  CEOs should “pick their spots” but then be sure their voices are heard when good things happen.  This can be done in writing, in meetings, on intranet postings, on Facebook pages and through “tweets.”  Whatever the channel, the CEO must engage in this activity.
  8. Measuring Productivity.  Perhaps the most important question to be asked about a given compensation strategy is whether or not it made the workforce more productive.  Did people become more engaged as a result of how they were being paid?  Is execution improving.  If so, are there measurable results to prove it?  Having mechanisms in place that isolate the return on investment that the company is achieving  through its human capital are critical to evaluating the effectiveness of its rewards strategies.  While a CEO does not have assume the task of coming up with the specific means of making a productivity assessment, he or she must insist it be measured and consistently review the trends the analysis portends.
  9. Holding People Accountable. If a rewards strategy isn’t working, the CEO needs to know that.  And someone has to be accountable for the lack of results being generated.  If the other areas outlined in this article are properly addressed, this will be an easy step to take.  Roles and outcomes will have been clearly defined.  Accountability in this arena means that everyone in those roles understands what will happen if the outcomes intended aren’t being realized through the specific pay programs for which they have charge.  When results fall short, it will not always mean that the specific plan in question is bad or not performing properly.  However, those responsibile need to be able to “account” for why results are what they are.

Our experience has been that in companies where this level of engagement (in the compensation discussion) from the CEO exists, performance occurs at an accelerated pace.  Presumably, this happens because alignment has a greater possibility of occuring in organizations where the person at the top understands the essential and strategic role of compensation in creating a unified financial vision for growing the business.

To learn more about this issue, please view our webinar recording entitled “Why CEOs Should Drive Compensation Strategy.”

Ken Gibson
March 18th, 2011 by Ken Gibson

Compensation as a Wealth Multiplier

Okay, let’s get something out of the way at the outset.   At VisionLink, we don’t consider wealth to be a dirty word. Nor do we believe that those who pursue it are somehow less noble than the rest of humanity. 

In fact, most of our client interaction is with financially successful people.  We have found that the majority of them (yes, there are exceptions) view wealth creation as a means of serving multiple “worthy” ends, expanding their ability to “make a difference” in people’s lives and to otherwise have a postive impact within their sphere of influence.    At a minimum, because some actively pursue a superior level of economic well being (wealth), many others (employees, suppliers, customers, communities and so on) are able to meet their cash flow, standard of living, security and/or wealth accumulation needs and goals. 

In short, wealth creates opportunities and options where the lack of it diminishes them. So…let’s hear it for wealth.

Given that view, we conisder our core work at VisionLink to be one of enabling business leaders to grow from being simply wealth creators to becoming wealth mulipliers.  A wealth creator is really anyone that is running a profitable business. Wealth multipliers, on the other hand, are those that are able expand both the level of economic benefit that is created and the number of people that participate in it. In simple terms, this means that not only shareholders but all stakeholders in an organization participate in the benefits of expanded value creation.

Done correctly, this is a key role that  compensation can and should play in an organization.  It is a strategic tool that a business owner or CEO should be using to create a more unified financial vision for growing the business.  If this is going to occur, the rewards strategies–especially incentives–should be constructed in a way that communicates the following to all who have a vested interest in the company’s success:

  • Growth.  We see tomorrow’s company as bigger and better than today’s.  It will be different in size and scope and influence.
  • Meaning. We recognize that you have a personal vision for the future that is bigger and better than today’s as well.  We don’t expect you to be interested in helping us fulfill our vision if we don’t help you fulfill yours.
  • Partnership.  As a result of our interdependent visions, we see you as a key partner in what we are creating. We recognize that the combined unique abilities and visions of each of our employees is what creates the unique culture that makes us successful.
  • Clarity. Because our goals are connected, we need to have a shared vision of what it means to create value.  As a result, we want you to have a clear perspective about the outcomes we must achieve and the results we need to drive to get there.
  • Value Creation.  Finally, we will adopt a rewards philosophy that communicates our commitment to share value with those who help create value.  We recognize that this commits us to a self-reinforcing cycle of growth.  The greater the value we are able to share, the more evidence we have that our shared vision has been achieved.

It is our strong view that companies that work from this core, philosophical premise find dealing with compensation issues a completely different experience.  The process of developing specific metrics and measures for a given pay plan are easier to navigate if we understand that, at the end of the day, we are simply trying to move from being mere wealth creators to becoming wealth multipliers.  When that occurs, everyone wins.

If this concept appeals to you, you should sign up today for our webinar next Tuesday entitiled: “Does Your Compensation Strategy Drive or Hinder Growth?”  I hope you can join us.

Ken Gibson
February 11th, 2011 by Ken Gibson

What Does Your Compensation Program Cost?

Most business leaders are cost conscious, because they know that all expenses impact the proverbial bottom line.  As a result, when they consider compensation issues, they commonly think in terms of “managing costs.”  This perspective is revealed to us through statements or questions such as the following:

  • I can’t afford to pay incentives right now.
  • I’ll need to know what a long-term incentive plan will cost before I….
  • What is the market rate of pay for these positions?
  • How do I keep my payroll expense under control?

Cost is a large part of our focus when we are engaged to work with clients.  However, we try to help the business leaders we work with to look at costs in two potential contexts:

  1. What are the “structural” costs associated with your rewards strategies?  This would include understanding and evaluating all of the known as well as hidden costs across the range of compensation and benefits strategies currently being offered. For example, hidden costs associated with welfare plan utilization, unclear fee sharing associated with 401(k) plan investment offerings and administrative services, and so on.
  2. What are the “performance” costs associated with your rewards strategies?  Humm.  What do we mean by performance costs?  Read on.

One of the most costly issues a company can face is under performance.  This occurs when a business isn’t able to achieve sustained results because it either is attracting only good people when what it needs is great talent, or the people it has in key positions are not working in full alignment with the core business model and strategy of the company.  We see this over and over again. 

Too often CEOs are making cost containment decisions about rewards strategies that they believe are saving the company thousands of dollars.  Unfortunately, the issue is being evaluated in a silo and is not being measured against the performance standard that needs to be met.  The question shouldn’t be “how much” compensation are we or should we be paying?  The question needs to be “how” should we pay compensation; meaning, what forms of rewards should be included in our mix and what weight should they each be given to: a) attract the kind of talent we need for the performance level we are seeking, and, b) keep those people properly focused and achieving once they’re here.

So while we’re big proponents of evaluating and measuring structural costs, we believe bigger losses occur when companies don’t properly evaluate the performance costs associated with their compensation game plan.

To read more about this concept, click here.

Ken Gibson
January 21st, 2011 by Ken Gibson

Does Compensation Support Your Business Model?

Many business leaders we work with don’t draw a distinction (in perception or practice) between their business strategy and their business model.  As a result, they approach decision making differently than they would if they saw these things as related but distinct functions.  Certainly, poor compensation decisions emerge out of environments where rewards aren’t properly connected to the business plan.  Here’s why.

Business models refer to the logic of the company–how it operates and creates and captures value for stake holders in a competitive marketplace.  (See “How to Design a Winning Business Model,” HBR, January-February 2011, Ramon Casadesus-Masanell and Joan E. Ricart)  It defines policy choices, asset choices and governance choices (how the company will address decisions over the other two choice issues).  Strategy, on the other hand,  is a plan that relates to activities the company will engage in to create a unique and valuable position in the marketplace. 

 A key issue, then, is how a company will integrate compensation into the logic of the business model.  The policy choice has to do with the underlying philosophy that will guide the development of all compensation strategies.  The asset choice has to do with how rewards components (salary, sales incentives, performance incentives, growth incentives, etc.) will be applied and assigned to the company’s human resources.  Governance has to do with the ongoing practices and structure that will be used to ensure that pay will continue to reinforce the business model.

Here’s an example of what I mean.  Let’s say a company’s value proposition initiates certain reinforcement cyles that expand its position and secure its customer base.  Wireless phone service is a good example.  By contract, a person has to buy a two-year service and everytime they upgrade to a new phone, they get a discount and have to renew for another two years.  It is a self perpetuating model.  The revenue structure is built on renewing wireless service contracts, sales of hardware, ancillary services (such as data pages) and so on. Certain outcomes, then need to be reinforced in every aspect of the company’s choices.  Compensation must reflect and reinforce the revenue reinforcement model and fully engage employees in a mindset of top-line renewal plus growth.  

In such a framework, leadership needs to look at compensation through two interdependent sets of lenses:

  1. Structure–This facet needs to address the question: “what processes will ensure that every decision made relative to compensation will have the proper impact on strategy, cost and productivity in support of our model?”  Structure gives the company a decision making and implementation framework.
  2. Mindset–The other category poses this query: “what specific pay programs will ensure that our employees take ownership (a stewardhsip) of our  business model and its support strategy?”  This has to do with employee engagement, focus and sustained execution. 

If either of these dimensions of compensation development and management is neglected, certain dangers emerge.  If the structure is not there, then strategy, cost and productivity issues are not addressed.  The danger then is that employees take the company in the wrong direction (at odds with its business model), it spends rewards dollars that don’t necessarily drive value for shareholders and employees, and the company does not produce an “above market” return on its total rewards investment (capital could have been better invested elsewhere).

Likewise, if mindset issues are not properly addressed, the company can develop great pay strategies but the employees don’t understand them, or the rewards programs are disengaged from issues they can impact.  The dangers that emerge in this arena are that employees see incentives as entitlements, no ownership mindset is in evidence,  there is a general lack of clarity about the future of the business and the company is unable to unlock the full passion and focus of its workforce.

Because I see this negative pattern emerge all too fequently, it is my recommendation that any compensation discussion begin with a basic question: “What is our business model?”  Until and unless a business can define that, it will be hard pressed to develop a compensation plan that will drive growth instead of hindering it.

For more insights on this issue, join us at our webinar next Tuesday, January 25 entitled “The Eight Fatal Compensation Mistakes.”

Ken Gibson
December 22nd, 2010 by Ken Gibson

The Three Comp and Benefits Essentials

 I would like to make a plea before we close out 2010.  As you examine your compensation and benefit strategies for the new year, please consider three outcomes your approach should (dare I say, must?) include.  I would even go so far as to call these imperatives for any company hoping to have a workforce that drives growth in 2011 and beyond.

  1. Strategy–ask yourself this question: “Do our compensation and benefits strategies drive execution of key strategic initiatives and make the achievement of the company’s growth goals more likely?”  For this to happen, at a minimum there must be alignment between the business plan of the company and rewards.  Your pay and benefits strategies should also reflect a philosophy that creates appropriate ties between pay and performance in a way that nurtures a sense of partnership with the workforce and instills an ownership mindset.
  2. Cost–in this regard, the question to be asked is: “Do we institute practices  that ensure we create greater compensation and benefits efficiencies and lower or eliminate unnecessary expense?”   Here the issue is establishing the means by which a company routinely examines the cost structure of all its plans, introduces appropriate cost sharing arrangements, expands/inplements flexibility of benefits, increases education on fiscal practices and institutes “well-being” initiatives that help lower overall health benefit costs and decrease time away from work.
  3. Productivity–with this final imperative, the critical question to be answered is: “Do we generate a measurable, positive return on the company’s human capital investment?”   To accomplish this, companies should ensure that their approach to incentive planning is self financing,  involves sound metrics and that programs are only implemented once they have been appropriately modeled and tested.  The company must then institute appropropriate measurement tools to track its real return on the compensation and benefit dollars that have been paid out.

As you examine these areas and institute changes accordingly, please share your successes and frustrations in the comments section of this blog so others can benefit from your experience.  You can also email me with your thoughts at kgibson@vladvisors.com.

For more information on how some of these things can be successfully accomplished, please check out the Information and Resources section of our website or the  webinars we have archived on our site.

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.”

Ken Gibson
July 26th, 2010 by Ken Gibson

Sales vs. Performance vs. Growth Incentives

Periodically, we will receive a call from a business leader seeking our help to build a more effective incentive plan.  Often, it takes a while to determine whether what is being sought is a sales plan or a broader performance-based reward.  The difficulty in decifering which kind of approach is needed stems from the fact that many businesses don’t yet know what outcome they are trying to influence through their incentive plan(s).

With that anecdotal evidence in mind, I assume many struggle with this issue.  As a result, I offer here  some general things to consider when thinking about incentives:

  • Sales Incentives–Compensation programs for sales people are typically a distinct “animal.”  Their purpose and form are centered solely on increasing sales.  Although a sales incentive might be in the form of a commission or bonus (or both), it’s focus is strictly on rewarding a certain desired sales result.  They are intended to address the following performance factor: “What the company wants sold, to whom and in what volume.”Those participating in a sales incentive could, conceivably, also receive a performance or growth incentive.  However, it is less likely they will receive the former since their sales incentive rewards short-term performance results .  A long-term incentive, however, creates a different focus and could more commonly be paid to those responsible for sales functions, particularly those whose stewardship it is to accelerate top-line growth. (See Growth Incentives below.)
  • Performance Incentives–Companies that want to create focus on key performance indicators or profitability standards measured in increments of 12 months or less are looking for this type of reward.  Performance incentives seek to communicate the following to participating employees: “This is the outcome we need you to focus on during this period of time and how it will be measured and rewarded.”  Performance incentives help participants understand their role in this year’s strategy, what’s expected of them in that role and how they will be remunerated for fulfilling those expectations.  The overall incentive may reward something for company performance, team or department performance, individual performance or all three.  The “weighting” of those factors may be different for various “tiers” of employees.  Annual, semi-annual or quarterly bonus arrangements are types of performance incentives.As with sales incentives, participants in a performance incentive plan may–and commonly do–participate in a growth incentive as well.
  • Growth Incentives–Organizations that seek to align the company’s reward’s strategy with its business plan should have some kind of growth incentive.  Such a plan communicates where the company is headed in the future (beyond the next 12 months) and how those that help to fuel growth will participate in that increase.  Growth incentives seek to create a unified financial vision for growing the business and send the following message to participants: “You are an important partner in our growth plans and this is how we intend to have you participate in the value you help create.”  Stock, stock options, phantom equity, SAR, Performance Unit Plans and Profit Pools are examples of growth incentives that companies commonly use to fulfill this part of their overall rewards strategy.

Most companies think in terms of specific types of plans instead of the kind of performance they seek to drive as they approach the design of their incentives.  Instead, we recommend you isolate the performance category you are trying to address as indicated above and then begin thinking of the compensation s0lutions that will drive the outcomes you seek.

At a minimum, now if you call us, we will perhaps be speaking the same language!

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.