September 15th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
I have recently become somewhat a student of innovation; particularly looking at how great companies and individuals manage to get ideas and products implemented while others stop and stall. Among the things I’ve assimilated in that learning process are the following:
- Great innovators associate. Those that are prone to effective innovation are constantly associating one idea or experience with others. They also systemitize the association process so that it occurs regular and naturally.
- Great innovators question everything. Their curiosity is insatiable and they want to get to the bottom of things. Why are things the way they are? Do they need to be like that?
- Great innovators network. They want to associate with people that have a broad range of backgrounds and experiences so their life view is expansive and their feedback loop is broad.
- Great innovators seek feedback. They want to know what others think before they introduce a product to market. They want it tested. It doesn’t have to be perfect, but it has to meet the right need in the right way.
- Great innovators have a bias towards action. Innovating is not dreaming or wishing or even just being creative. It is about getting ideas implemented and working in a way that transforms the end user’s experience.
There’s more I’ve learned, but let’s work with that list for now. As we examine it in the context of compensation there are some important issues to consider. A company’s approach to building effective rewards needs to follow a similar process:
- Those that develop compensation programs need to be able to view compensation as a dynamic tool and ”associate” each component both with other elements of pay and with the business model of the company. As the company’s innovation cycle continues and expands, the approach to rewards needs to be able to reflect that new reality.
- If individuals are going to create an “innovative” rewards structure, they have to be willing to question everything. What is the outcome we’re trying to drive? Why is that important? How should that outcome be rewarded? When should it be rewarded?
- Innovative companies look beyond the “network” of their own industry in seeking creative ways to properly reward people for value creation. They don’t think in terms of what the peer companies in their “space” are doing. They look at what great, innovative companies are doing and then take lessons from their approaches to everything, including pay.
- Businesses that are effective at every level have a continuous feedback system in place. They measure and assess. They look at data and make decisions based on what that data reveals. Similarly, they seek feedback from their workforce about whether they are succeeeding at creating a sense of partnership, painting a compelling vision and building a sense of unity about the outcomes being pursued. If they aren’t, they use pay as one of their strategic tools to target a better result.
- Companies that get compensation right usually get a lot of other things right because they are prone to act. They don’t let the pursuit of the perfect paralyze them from taking action. They get close enough, they stay focused, they get it done, roll it out and then make adjustments as they need to.
As you approach bettering the compensation strategies you wish to adopt, hopefully you will likewise become a student of innovation. If you do, the horizon of possibilities will expand and your ability to drive results will be magnified.
Tags: breakthrough success, Culture of Confidence, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Key Talent Compensation | No Comments »
September 9th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
You have smart people working for you. For the most part, they believe in the company and where it’s headed. Because they are thoughtful and intelligent, they are willing to learn about the role you want them to play in creating value for the business. The better ones had options when they chose to work for your company. The best ones have other options now.
So, if what I describe above is familiar to you–if you have one or more person like this working for you right now–what would they say to you about compensation if they were honest about their expectations?
In the course of our work with clients, we have interviewed hundreds of just such individuals within successful businesses. In composite terms, I’d now like to share what we’ve heard. I’ll categorize the responses in three groups and then lay out the expectations of those we’ve spoken to in the first person; speaking as if I were that smart, thoughtful employee who did and does have options.
- Sustainable Cash Flow–”I recognize that my experience and skill level merit a certain level of pay. I’m not stupid; I’ve done some research, asked around and I know what most people in my position earn. I’ve built a certain lifestyle around that expectation. Now I just want to know that as long as I perform–and the company continues to do well–I’ll have enough guaranteed and incentive income to keep me and my family in our ‘world’ and still be able to plan for the future. As a result, it would be helpful to know what philosophy the company has going forward for how much of my earnings will be guaranteed and how much upside potential there will be through “value sharing” if I help the company meet its growth targets. To the extent some of my compensation will be ‘at risk,’ I’d like to be clear on the measures being used to determine payouts and know that those metrics are based on something I have control over. I would also favor something that isn’t ‘all or nothing’; if we achieve a superior result, it would be nice to know even more would be available. That would be meaningful to me–and seem fair.”
- Security– “There are certain risks that could change my world pretty quickly. If a member of my family becomes seriously sick or injured, or if I die or become disabled, I need some means of protection. Likewise, I need to be able to plan properly for retirement, education for my kids and so on. I certainly don’t expect the company to foot the bill for every type of risk I’m trying to plan for or protect against. At the same time, I recognize the business is in a unique position to use the size of its workforce as leverage to obtain certain benefits and that’s it’s also in the company’s best interest that its key people not be too vulnerable. So, I hope I can have some flexibility in my benefit options that will allow me to address my circumstances in as customized a manner as possible. I’m willing to share in the cost of doing so–I just want to make sure consideration is being given to the range of issues that could impact both me and the company if proper planning isn’t done. Here are some of the things the ideal arrangement would include:
- Medical Insurance—options for PPO, HMO, catastrophic coverage (dental, vision, long-term care options are a plus and having some options even at my cost would be helpful in this regard)
- Life Insurance—options for additional coverage at a group rate are ideal; some kind of permanent coverage the company pays for while I’m employed is better (I’ve heard of things such as ‘split dollar’ arrangements where the company gets its money back when I leave)
- Disability Coverage—this one worries me the most; so it would be great if there was either a group plan or individual coverage that replaces my income if I’m not able to work; again, I’m willing to share in the cost of this but I also recognize it takes the company off the hook for having to decide what to do if I am out with some kind of long-term condition
- Retirement Plan—a 401(k) is great, I’d just like to make sure you’re looking out for me in the investment options I’m given and that you are making sure hidden costs are being squeezed out so I can maximize my benefit. If the company makes a contribution to the plan, it tells me they value a long-term relationship with me and want to help me plan for my future
- Supplemental Retirement Plan—it’s a bummer that the government restricts my contributions to the 401(k) plan; what I put in is based on what people earning less than me put in. As a result, having a supplemental plan to allow me to set aside more for the future and on a tax favored basis would be ideal. I know many companies provide this through some kind of deferred compensation arrangement”
- Wealth Accumulation—“It’s nice having a retirement plan, but it’s not what I mean by having a wealth accumulation opportunity. I’m talking about having the means to share in the ‘wealth’ I help create in the business. If my commitment of time and talent means the company achieves something it wouldn’t have achieved without that contribution, is it not fair to want to participate in the value I help generate? It seems like a win/win to me if it’s set up properly. I don’t care whether I get equity or not—I just want to know that there is a long-term mechanism in place that makes the achievement of the owners’ vision a financially meaningful event for me. I’d be motivated by that and it would seem like more of a partnership arrangement if I can participate in something like that.”
So, there you have it. That’s what your best employees are thinking and what they’d like to say if given the chance. Now you know. You’re welcome.
For more information on this topic, view our webinar entitled: “What Your Employees are not Telling You about your Current Rewards Programs.”
Tags: compensation, compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, employee stock, employee stock owenership, Employee Trust, Growth, incentives, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Managing Talent | 1 Comment »
August 17th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
Engagement is one of the Holy Grails in business. Every organization seeks it in its workforce. Most company leaders can’t define it, but they know it when they see it…and they know it’s what’s missing when the business fails to reach its potential. Engaged employees are like fuel to company growth and those who aren’t make everything move in slow motion.
For an employee to become “engaged,” a company must address what I refer to as “The Three ‘Cs’.” They go like this.
Engagement emerges when an employee feels:
- Compelled–the business has a compelling future and the employee sees how his unique ability can contribute to its fulfillment. This is about shared vision and values.
- Clarity–leadership gives the employee a clear understanding of the business model and strategy what will fulfill the vision, what role he has in that plan and what’s expected of him in that role, and how he will be rewarded if he fulfills those expectations.
- Connection–the employee feels a sense of partnership with company owners. Whether or not equity is shared, he understands there is a philosophy about value creation and value sharing that is fair. As a result, all stake holders feel connected.
Well, if that’s what it takes to secure an engaged employee, what will the result look and “taste” like once it’s achieved? In my experience, companies that nurture engagement end up with employees that manifest that quality in each of three ways:
- Focus–more time is spent on the “best” results that can be achieved, not just good or better. There is an outcome rather than a task orientation that is evident. The employee “gets” what result the company is looking for and displays a sense of stewardship about it.
- Commitment–company leaders see that the employee has taken ownership of the future in a similar way that shareholders have. It is apparent that it is meaningful to him for the company to achieve its vision because he knows what it will mean to him personally.
- Shared Purpose–an engaged employees demonstrate a contribution ethic that extends beyond his specific role in the company. It is a manifestation of the shared purpose he has with co-workers, other teams or departments and with ownership. This means he behaves in a way that demonstrates his understanding of the interdependent nature of the independent roles throughout the organization. He understands that today he may depend on someone else, but tomorrow that same associate may depend on him to achieve a desired result in which all have a stake.
In my experience, companies that use compensation as the strategic tool it is intended to be see rewards as one means of smoothing if not reinforcing the path to engagement. For example, they offer employees a long-term incentive plan that fosters the shared purpose indicated above. It’s payout metrics are tied to a combination of company-wide performance, team or department performance and individual performance. Such an approach nourishes a culture of contribution–because all have a financial stake that evokes a kind of “moral” bond with their associates. If I fail in my stewardship, it doesn’t just impact me and if you slow down, I am also affected.
Leadership, then, should examine its current practices through a kind of reverse engineering process. It starts by asking whether the workforce is currently, as a whole, manifesting outward signs of engagement (focus, commitment, shared purpose). If not, it should then ask what can be done to promote a compelling vision, create greater clarity and enable the sense of connection and partnership that are foundational to engagement. In the process, it should be sure to ask itself whether current compensation practices are more likely or less to promote the outcomes just discussed.
It is realistic to anticipate a fully engaged workforce? It is. I’ve seen it first hand. For one example, see my blog entitled: “What a Competitive Advantage Sounds Like.” The concept is further developed in another blog posting entitled: “Compensation and Trust.” Finally, to learn how to get from an entitlement mentality to engagement, view our recent webinar entitled: “What to do When your Employees Act Entitled.”
Tags: Applied Medical, breakthrough success, compensation, compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, Employee Trust, Growth, key people, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Incentive Planning, Managing Talent | No Comments »
August 10th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
Pay can either be an asset or a liability to a company. Stated another way, it can either drive growth or hinder it– fuel performance or diminish it. Is that placing too big a burden on compensation to produce results? I don’t think so. In fact, my experience and observation has been that most businesses don’t set high enough expectations for their rewards programs. The evidence is they don’t invole compensation in other strategic discussions. The result is there is little to no link established between pay and the key success measures the company needs to reach.
To change this outcome a company must alter how it makes compensation decisions. Here I would like to suggest five of the key issues a business must include and successfully address in its decision making process if it wants to drive better results in the execution, productivity and performance of its people. Here are the five presented in the form of questions to be answered:
- How can we reinforce our business model through the way we pay our people? Implied in this decision is a company’s ability to clearly articulate its business model and distinguish it from it’s business strategy. (For more information on this distinction, view our recent webinar entitled: Compensation Strategy and Business Strategy, An Interdependent Relationship.) Walmart and Four Seasons Hotels have very different business models, so their approach to pay would need to reflect that difference. Presumably, your business will be equally distinct. So in this category two essential issues need to be addressed: A)What outcomes reinforce the core virtuous cycles of your business model? B)What kind of pay strategies will best reinforce those outcomes?
- What kind of value-sharing approach best reflects the kind of partnership we want to have with our employees? I prefer the term value sharing to incentives because the latter implies that someone needs a carrot to become motivated. Value sharing, on the other hand, implies all stakeholders deserve to participate in the value they help create. Company leaders must think in these terms as they approach the building of short and long-term rewards programs. Such programs must be self-financing (no dollars paid unless results are produced at a sufficiently high level) on the one hand and yet meaningful to participants (employees want to see them achieved because the payout helps them fulfill their personal financial needs and goals) on the other.
- What pay components will best foster a unified financial vision for growing the business? This issue has to do with how employees will be paid as opposed to how much. Addressing this issue forces a company to develop a basic rewards philosophy. Where do you want to be vis a vis market pay for salaries? How about for total compensation? It asks a company to think about the elements of pay that will best foster an ownership mentality throughout the organization, so employees are empowered in their decision making and more instinctively act in the long-term interests of shareholders and all other stake holders.
- What structure do we need to maintain to ensure our compensation strategies produce the desired results? Structure has to do with organization and process. A company needs to have a systemitized means of assessing performance and productivity and then “pivoting” in a different direction if necessary. The structure continues to keep strategy front and center with a constant eye on cost and productivity. For most companies, this means there should be a compensation committee established with a regular meeting schedule (no less than twice a year) to review and make decisions about these issues.
- How can we communicate our rewards strategies in a way that best impacts the mindset of our employees? If effective, a strategic approach to building rewards programs should result in more engaged employees. This does not come by simply rolling out a great compensation plan. Engagement is built over time through a reinforcement process that integrates the discussion about pay into an overall strategy and business plan review to which all stake holders are exposed. As employees come to work each day, there should be a clear connection in their minds between the following: A) The vision of the company–where it’s headed; B) The business model and strategy of the company–how it’s vision will be fulfilled; C) The role and expectations of the employee within that model and strategy–defining the stewardship, and; D) How the employee will be rewarded if he or she meets the expectations–including the range of pay potential.
Certainly, more could be added to that list. However, if a company attempts to address even one of the five decisions summarized here they will naturally be lead to the other four. You will see that they are really interdependent in nature. Likewise, other core decisions will emerge such has what balance should there be between short and long-term value sharing plans, and what type of long-term rewards ”incentive” should a company adopt (equity sharing, profit pool, phantom stock, stock appreciation rights, etc.)? Most will need help answering all of the questions that will emerge, but it must start with a foundational commitment to becoming more strategic in your approach to rewards development.
The promise is that, if incorporated, this list of five core decisions will help ensure that compensation will become an asset rather than a liability in your organization.
Tags: compensation philosophy and strategy, Employee Trust, Growth, incentives, long-term shareholder value, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation | No Comments »
July 31st, 2011 by Ken Gibson
The full title of this article should really read, “Why a Long-Term Incentive Plan Matters…MORE than Other Types of Incentive Plans.” However, I didn’t want you worn out before even starting the article–so forgive the abbreviated headline.
I recognize that’s quite a claim, but hear me out. My premise is based, in part, on what recent HBR authors Paul Adler, Charles Hecksher and Laurence Prusak have discovered about institutions that have sustained records of both efficiency and innovation. Among other things, these organizations excel at achieving the following three things:
- A Shared Purpose. An effective shared purpose, the authors indicate, “articulates how a group will position itself in relation to competitors and partners–and what key contributions to customers and society will define its success.”
- An Ethic of Contribution. Collaboratives communities generate accelerated results. Such organizations instill a bias towards contribution which in turn ”accords the highest value to people who look beyond their specific roles and advance the common purpose,” according to Adler, Hecksher and Prusak.
- Interdependent Processes. In their article, the HBR authors quote a project manager from Computer Science Corporation as follow: “People support what they create…As a project manager, you’re too far away from the technical work to define the [processes] yourself…It’s only by involving your key people that you can be confident you have good [procedures] that have credibility in the eyes of their peers.”
At this point you may be saying to yourself, “This is all very interesting, but what does it have to do with long-term incentive plans..and why they matter more than any other rewards plan within our business?” In a word, everything.
For a business to grow, it depends upon the collaborative efforts of a workforce that shares in the purposes and ends to which the company is working. By nature, organizations are made up of interdependent teams and individuals whose motivation for building cooperative processes depends upon buying into a shared ethic of contribution. In an ideal environment, employees recognize the value that grows out of a sense of partnership with those to whom they are “tethered” in the work that fulfills the shared purpose. When this can be harnessed and perpetuated, there is a magnified fulfillment experienced by everyone collectively and individually.
The role, then, of the Long-Term Incentive Plan is to define the financial nature and benefit of engaging in the three elements outlined above. Said another way, if all I experience from a pay program is a salary and annual bonus, there is no financial mechanism fostering in me the role of a shared purpose, the ethic of contribution and the interdependent processes that must be sustained for growth to emerge and then be sustained. While it isn’t the only piece of the equation that allows these things to take root, if a long-term component isn’t there, it is difficult for people to trust that a true partnership has been entered into with those who control the financial future of the business.
This is one of the primary reasons we tell our clients that they must make it a priority to introduce the long-term component in their rewards gameplan. When coupled with the short-term incentive, it balances the focus of participants between generating results right now with building and protecting long-term value .
For more information on the role long-term incentives can play in your company, check out our webinar entitled: How to Build Long-Term Value for Key Producers.
Tags: compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, Growth, incentives, key people, long-term shareholder value, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
July 15th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
Many of the business leaders we work with struggle to find the right metrics for measuring acceptable growth in their companies. In a recent article at Strategy+Business entitled “Total Shareholder Returns”, authors Ken Favaro and Greg Rotz offer some great insights in this regard. Although the article addresses issues primarily relevant to public companies, the principles discussed have broad application. It’s worth the read so check it out.
Towards the end of the article, the authors make this point as it relates to managing strategy and execution towards improving Total Shareholder Returns:
“Only two factors determine the value creation path of any company: the distinctiveness of its strategies and the execution of those strategies. We often hear statements such as, ‘A great strategy is worth nothing without great execution’ or ‘I’d rather have great execution with a mediocre strategy than the other way around.’ The reality is that strategy and execution are two sides of one coin. Is Southwest Airlines or Tesco or Wells Fargo the product of great execution or of great strategies? Yes. Both are needed to produce consistently superior shareholder returns.
“What, then, will enable your company to have and sustain distinctive strategies and execution? In our experience, this achievement requires proficiency in both the formal and the informal aspects of a company’s management. On the formal side are corporate strategy, business strategies, strategic planning, resource allocation, performance management, incentive compensation, organizational design, and role of the corporate center. On the informal side are leadership behaviors, peer-to-peer networks, teaming norms and skills, nonfinancial motivators, pride, and a strong sense of the business’s purpose.”
As it relates to VisionLink’s approach to compensation, we refer to the formal and informal aspects as the “structural” and “mindset” impact of pay decisions. Much of what this article discusses helps identify the kind of structural issues that need to be properly defined if a strong rewards strategy is going to be tied to them. If the structure is not properly built, it will be difficult for employees to understand that to which they are devoting their minds and hearts, and how it will be measured.
For more help on this topic, check out our webinar recording entitled: “How Shareholders Should View Compensation.”
Tags: breakthrough success, compensation and the recession, compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, incentives, long-term shareholder value, Pay for performance, profitability, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Recession Strategies | No Comments »
July 8th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
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?”
Tags: breakthrough success, compensation and the recession, compensation philosophy and strategy, Growth, incentives, key people, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Managing Talent, Recession Strategies | No Comments »
June 29th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.”
Tags: Compensation Committees, compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, Growth, incentives, long-term shareholder value, Pay for performance, profitability, rewards, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning | No Comments »
May 27th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.”
Tags: breakthrough success, ceo, compensation and the recession, compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, Growth, long-term shareholder value, rewards, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation, Managing Talent, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
March 18th, 2011 by Ken Gibson
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.
Tags: breakthrough success, compensation philosophy and strategy, Culture of Confidence, Growth, incentives, long-term shareholder value, Pay for performance, Sustained Results
Posted in Business Growth & Compensation, Business Growth and Rewards, Compensation Planning, Current Pay Trends and Topics, Incentive Planning, Key Talent Compensation | No Comments »