Compensation Cafe

Is Co-Creative Analytics the Answer?

There's been a lot of talk about skill shortages at the Cafe lately. Jim Brennan points out that the educational system may be incapable of closing the talent deficit, resulting in a broken link between compensation and education. Ann Bares also discusses the skill shortage, and thinks the answer may lie in cooperation between the recruiting and compensation functions.

Addressing the challenge of the skill shortage in today's economic environment requires a new approach, and I think Ann may be on to something. I'm a big fan of interdisciplinary solutions. The interdisciplinary approach has led to advancements in disease prevention, economic development and global climate change. It has even led to the development of new fields of study like nanotechnology, genomics and bioinformatics. It brings fresh perspectives to old problems, and can lead to astonishing breakthroughs. 

It may be difficult to find a starting point for this inter-departmental cooperation, given that recruiting and compensation are each unfamiliar with the other's vernacular. Data may be the universal translator, and co-creative analytics may be the ideal starting point.

What is co-creative analytics? Here's how the process was described in a recent HBR blog post:

You put together ad-hoc teams that involve not only analysts with relevant domain expertise but also represent skills from other domains, which brings new ways of thinking to old analytical problems. Over a short two or three day period the team will brainstorm around the problem involved and bring together as much data and as many analytical frameworks as they can to both frame up the problem and outline potential solutions or at least pathways to solutions.

As Ann points out, the solution to the skill shortage may lie in a collaborative effort to better understand alternate candidate pools and identify the rewards strategies likely to attract and retain these candidates. It's easy to see how co-creative analytics could facilitate this collaboration.

This same interdisciplinary approach has applications in other areas of the organization. Performance management immediately comes to mind. A co-creative analytics approach could provide better alignment of individual performance goals with the goals of the organization. It's likely that based on different past successes and failures, different departments will approach a given organizational goal in different ways. Sharing those approaches across departmental lines can spark new ways of looking at old problems, pushing the organization forward.

What other kinds of organizational challenges could co-creative analytics address? 

 

Stephanie R. Thomas is an economic and statistical consultant specializing in EEO issues and employment litigation risk management. Since 1999, she's been working with businesses and government agencies providing expert quantitative analysis. Stephanie's articles on examining compensation systems for internal equity have appeared in professional journals and she has appeared on NPR to discuss the gender wage gap. Stephanie is the founder of Thomas Econometrics Inc., the host of The Proactive Employer radio show, and author of the upcoming book Compensating Your Employees Fairly: A Guide to Internal Pay Equity. Follow her on Twitter at @proactivemployr. 

Skill Shortages: An Opportunity for Recruiting and Compensation to Converge?

Too much focus on job titles is undermining our ability to fill our more challenging job openings, argues Matt Ferguson, CEO of CareerBuilder, in his recent HBR blog post.  By looking only at applicants with specific job titles and overlooking candidates who possess many of the essential skills required and who could take on the responsibilities with a basic investment in on-the-job training, he observes that many employers could be creating their own skill gaps.

In making his point, Ferguson highlights a study conducted recently by Economic Modeling Specialists International.  EMSI completed an analysis of 41 occupations commonly reported as having a skills shortage and then used their own compatibility index (which is based on O*Net competency calculations) to identify and estimate the number of workers who would be willing and able to switch occupations into categories where there skills may be more highly valued than in their current positions.  Where there appears to be an available and adequate pipeline of qualified workers, the EMSI analysis examines wage comparisons as well as other potential "opportunity costs" to understand the degree to which there are incentives for workers to cross occupational lines.

Essentially, EMSI is using this process to highlight situations where organizations could be overlooking "nearly perfect" candidates who possess many of the essential qualifications for a position.  Examples noted include a technology company trying to hire technical writers who might also consider paralegals with exposure to technology subject matter -- or a healthcare organization needing to find medical assistants who might also consider pharmacy technicians as a viable candidate pool.

The EMSI study (of which I have provided only a cursory overview here) raises some interesting questions and possibilities for both recruiting and compensation.  Through its analysis and findings, it prompts employers to consider supporting their recruiting efforts with deeper studies of the available labor markets in order to better understand the possibility and presence of alternate candidate pools -- and to also contemplate the pay and other types of incentives that might be necessary to attract candidates with compatible skills, so that appropriate reward strategies can be explored and put in place.

Seems to me to be an interesting opportunity for recruiting and compensation to put on their respective thinking caps and do a little collaborative problem solving.  You?

Ann Bares is the Founder and Editor of the Compensation Café,  Author of Compensation Force and Managing Partner of Altura Consulting Group LLC, where she provides compensation consulting to a wide range of client organizations.  Ann was recently named President Elect of the Twin Cities Compensation Network (the most awesome local reward network on the planet) and has joined the Advisory Board of the Compensation & Benefits Review, the leading journal for those who design, implement, evaluate and communicate total rewards.  She earned her M.B.A. at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School, is a bookhound and aspiring cook in her spare time.  Follow her on Twitter at @annbares. 

Creative Commons image "Converging Footsteps: My Father and Stepmother" by CarbonNYC

How You Can Transform Performance Management

If you work for a company that focuses on "what we want to become" then I've got some research findings for you. Instead of overdoing it with lots of details, I thought I'd just skip to a practical application of one area of the research findings. I'm covering insights that you can use to upgrade and update your performance management practices.

There is a world of exciting insights in "Global Talent 2021: How the new geography of talent will transform human resource strategies." It is a completely practical and fascinating report. Executed by Oxford Economics, it was produced in collaboration with an impressive list of heavy hitters: Towers Watson, AIG, American Express, British American Tobacco, the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California, Cummins, Coca-Cola, Edison International and the Organization of American States. You may want to check out the rest of the findings (highly encouraged) or wait until my next blog post for some more coverage of the study.

Imagine this. Instead of prodding employees to struggle through "what do we do next," you can use  these findings to apply performance management to the future. 

Here are the four skill areas that will be in most demand over the next five to ten years. Notice, not job titles or professions -- skill areas. Areas that are most likely applicable across your business and jobs. Areas that can be addressed now via MBOs, development plans and internal communications -- through your guidance -- to advance your company's capabilities as well as address your employees' desires for career development.

1. Digital skills. Here they are talking about an employee's ability to solve problems via digital applications rather than specific jobs. There is a exploding array of applications that make possible digital expression of work or collaborative processes. Much of this work entails marketing literacy. Anything else? Employee experience in ecommerce is an obvious example of a future need; so is addressing internal efficiencies digitally and overcoming inefficient legacy infrastructure.
2. Agile thinking. Most of us in HR understand that the future will bring increasing complexity and some "paradoxical" leaps (instead of iterative change). Do our employees have these expections too? Are they prepared to deal with them without extreme emotional upheaval? In the near future, the acceptance of this level of turmoil will be demonstrated in work practices that prepare for not only the preferred, but also additional scenarios. This flexible mindset, and these work practices, can be introduced to a business (and HR) with great immediate value.
3. Interpersonal and communication skills. HR is ahead of the curve in understanding the need for co-creative, collaborative, team-focused competencies. But few of us have gotten our companies to move very far ahead on the fundamental for innovation -- employees with such a deep understanding of the business and its strategy that they can adeptly align with them as they make any decision.
4. Global operating skills. Here's what the near future has in store. ' . . . according to Jeff Immelt, Chairman and CEO of GE, firms will increasingly move from "glocalization," where home market products and services are tailored to the tastes of overseas customers, to reverse innovation, under which innovation is led from emerging markets and then brought back home to mature markets.' Each company is at a different notch on this continuum, but I think it would be really helpful to employees if they could see this strategic shift more clearly. Use the performance management process to talk over this evolution together in the larger terms, instead of describing changes as one-at-a-time updates to individual products and clients.

Margaret O'Hanlon is founder and Principal of re:Think Consulting. She'll join Ann Bares and Dan Walter of the Compensation Cafe to speak the unspoken -- Everything You Do (in Compensation) Is Communication -- in an upcoming book. Margaret brings deep expertise in compensation, career development and communications to the dialog at the Café. Before founding re:Think Consulting, she was a Principal with Towers Watson. Margaret is Deputy Director of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) Pacific Plains Region. She earned her M.S. and Ed.S. in Instructional Technology at Indiana University, Bloomington. Creative writing is one of her outside passions, along with Masters Swimming.

The Forgotten Employee

Have you ever walked out of a store because of poor customer service?  Or felt frustrated because the employee at the other end of the phone didn't seem to care?  Or after enduring a bad experience with an employee at a particular establishment you said, “never again"?

Customers react first and foremost to the employee they're dealing with, the one they're facing, whether the transaction is financially significant or not.  To the customer, that employee is your company, and these decision-makers will consider the treatment they receive a reflection on your company, for good or ill.

The forgotten employee

It's worth noting that the person who just caused you to take your business elsewhere is likely one of the lowest paid employees in that organization.   Does that reward / impact relationship make sense to you?  Perhaps the organization doesn't recognize / reward (value) the impact that their employees can have on customer relations.

Many companies have long ignored the importance of the customer-facing job (non-direct sales) in determining a position’s value to their organization.  They consider education (what you know), experience (how long you've been doing something) and competitive survey data (what others are paid) in setting their pay scales.  The fact that the position also has the power of gaining or losing customers is often lost on them as “just part of the job description.”

Some job evaluation systems may give a nod for those who face customers on a regular basis, but such recognition is not often viewed as a critical factor – nor does it help determine where in the salary range the incumbent is paid.

Oftentimes it's the position with the least amount of “cachet” that presents the jobholder with the opportunity to influence customer action and reaction.  As an example, the employees most commonly approached by guests at Walt Disney World are the Custodial workers.

Is it not surprising then that these employees can have as great an impact on customer good will and retention as managers?  Studies have shown that having a pleasant experience when dealing with a company often outweighs price considerations and marketing glitz.

What to do

However, that doesn't mean that you have to pay more to these employees than the marketplace suggests, but it's in your best interest to ensure that they're fairly treated:

• Ensure that actual pay centers on the middle of the range or higher.  Don't risk having minimum pay scale workers interact with your customers (outside of fast-food outlets).

• Hire well into the salary range.  This isn't a time to be cheap.  That dollar you saved today could cause you to lose a great deal more later on.  

• Modify your performance appraisal process to recognize the customer facing role; attitude is just as critical here as know-how and experience. 

• Avoid structuring these as “dead end” jobs.   Offer upward opportunities for higher performing employees.

• Listen to them; they're talking to your customers and their suggestions for process improvements – even new products and services - should be considered.

How do you know whether your company is vulnerable?  1) Ensure that these positions are regularly surveyed for competitive pay practices, and then 2) Create a metric that segments the actual pay of your customer-facing employees to determine the average compa-ratio and spotlight the presence of low paid workers.   Then you'll know how well you're paying those closest to your customers.

Remember that each scenario of customer vs. employee reinforces the financial and long term impact of those who represent you in the marketplace.  Your reputation and business success hang in the balance.

So don't be "penny-wise and pound foolish."

Chuck Csizmar CCP is founder and Principal of CMC Compensation Group, providing global compensation consulting services to a wide variety of industries and non-profit organizations.  He is also associated with several HR Consulting firms as a contributing consultant.  Chuck is a broad based subject matter expert with a specialty in international and expatriate compensation.  He lives in Central Florida (near The Mouse) and enjoys growing fruit and managing (?) a brood of cats.

Creative Commons image courtesy of arka D

Stats Literacy: It's About Developing Your BS Meter

My Cafe Colleague Ann Bares recently wrote a post at Compensation Force entitled "Stats Literacy: A Survival Skill for the Age of Data." She references John Sumser, who said that "statistics literacy looks like a survival skill for 21st Century organizational life."

This couldn't be more true.

Statistical literacy, however, is more than just brushing up on the long-forgotten concepts and formulae from your Stats 101 course. The concepts and formulae are important, but the reality is this: without highly specialized training far beyond Stats 101, you're simply not going to have the quantitative skills cut it on the "technical" side of Big Data. 

As of 2012, the limits on the size of data sets that can be processed were measured in terms of exabytes (one exabyte = 1,000,000,000 gigabytes) of data. Handling these kinds of massively large data sets requires a particular set of skills: one part quant, one part IT, one part philosopher, and one part translator/communicator. Possessing these skills in the requisite proportions is a rarity, and it's why good Big Data analysts earn Big Bucks.

Does this mean you should just scrap any efforts on improving your quantitative skills? Absolutely not.

Focus your statistical literacy training on developing your BS meter. You can improve your ability to critically evaluate empirical analyses simply by knowing what questions to ask. Here are three examples to give you a flavor of what I mean:

• Were any additional studies performed that aren't presented here? It's not uncommon for multiple study approaches to be used in evaluating a data set. In some instances, different analyses lead to different conclusions. One study may indicate a strong positive relationship between wellness programs and employee retention, while another study may indicate that wellness programs have no impact on employee retention. It's important to get the big picture and evaluate all of the results, not just the ones that support a particular position. Hiding data or analyses should set your BS meter to high alert.
• What is the logical explanation for the reported relationship between X and Y? Big Data gave us data mining, or exploring large data sets for identifying previously unknown patterns. Big Data also gave us data dredging, or searching for relationships among variables with no pre-defined expectations based on logic and no validation of that relationship. There has to be some underlying explanation for the relationship. If the explanation seems contrived, it probably is, and you may have to call BS on this finding. 
• How does this result generalize from the sample to the larger population? Even though they have access to exabytes of data, analysts often focus on smaller samples within the larger data set. These samples can be smaller in terms of people (e.g., employees, customers, suppliers, etc.) or they can be smaller in terms of time (e.g., summer months, pre-Christmas holiday season, etc.). What is true for a given subset may not be true for the population as a whole. It's important to understand how a given result translates to the population at large. If it's not translatable, it's not usable.

As noted in the Harvard Business Review, "even as companies invest eight- and nine-figure sums to derive insight from information streaming in from suppliers and customers, less than 40% of employees have sufficiently mature processes and skills to do so."

Statistical literacy is about being able to make good decisions by balancing analysis and judgment. Successfully maintaining this balance is a critical skill for the 21st Century workplace.

Stephanie R. Thomas is an economic and statistical consultant specializing in EEO issues and employment litigation risk management. Since 1999, she's been working with businesses and government agencies providing expert quantitative analysis. Stephanie's articles on examining compensation systems for internal equity have appeared in professional journals and she has appeared on NPR to discuss the gender wage gap. Stephanie is the founder of Thomas Econometrics Inc., the host of The Proactive Employer radio show, and author of the upcoming book Compensating Your Employees Fairly: A Guide to Internal Pay Equity. Follow her on Twitter at @proactivemployr.

Image courtesy of Summers Fire via Flickr

What Do You Think?

When you consider the role of Compensation Management it's natural to first think of the competitive analysis and program recommendation process - where jobs are market-priced, salary structures are tweaked and a merit spend budget proposed for the coming year.  It’s the annual “here’s what I think we should do moment.”

These projects usually consume much of the final quarter, and when you add in the merit review process and short term incentive assessment and payouts, compensation practitioners can be very busy for several months running.  To many in senior management, that's what they do.  That, in essence, is their job.

What about the rest of the year, though?  What's the role of Compensation Management then, during the day-to-day?

The off season

Dotted throughout the year, during slow periods as well as "all hands on deck", compensation practitioners find themselves constantly challenged by scenarios where the red phone from Leadership has rung.  Questions will be asked, background data researched, and various issues that impact business operations will be explored.  The calls can be unpredictable in nature, timing and import - but have a common theme.   Compensation will be asked to provide information, answer questions and deliver research and analysis reports.  Some of the likely topics that could be raised are:

• Employee turnover is getting to be a problem.

• Our counter-offer policy (or lack) is causing issues with employee retention.

• We have too many red circle (over the max) or green circle (below minimum) employees.

• Managers are asking to increase eligibility for short term incentives.

• Payroll costs are getting out of hand.

• How effective are our pay programs?

• How to secure candidate "X" for the company.

Whatever your response to the question(s) at hand, you should always be prepared for when Leadership follows up with a question - "what do you think"?  That would be like a softball question tossed to a politician, so you’d better be able to hit it out of the park.  You'd better have an answer.

Compensation professionals should always have an opinion as to how rewards can and do (or could and should) affect the business.  You should anticipate the issue(s) that Leadership is concerned about and be ready to provide your own well-considered comments.  You should not simply point at a series of figures and say, "there you are." 

That would not be a career enhancing moment.  That is not managing anything.

The question you want to hear

If your role is to manage compensation, not to follow or administer it, then you need to anticipate the client needs and interests.  It's like an attorney who advises, "never question a witness where you don't already know the answer." So think about what you're offering up in terms of how business operations might be affected.

To think and act like a leader of the organization you should consider what your facts, figures and recommendations mean for the organization.  Even if you've not been directly asked.  On what pathway will your information place the organization, and what might like ahead – given the various options that should be considered.

Some questions that you should anticipate, and thus provide in your response:

• What will this cost, in both hard and soft dollars?

• What if we do nothing?

• What are the risks of the pathway ahead?

• How will these suggestions benefit the organization?

• What do you think we should do? And why?

When Leadership calls, that’s your chance to have an impact, to utilize persuasiveness and influencing skills to move the organization in the direction you feel is correct.

Don't waste the opportunity.

Chuck Csizmar CCP is founder and Principal of CMC Compensation Group, providing global compensation consulting services to a wide variety of industries and non-profit organizations.  He is also associated with several HR Consulting firms as a contributing consultant.  Chuck is a broad based subject matter expert with a specialty in international and expatriate compensation.  He lives in Central Florida (near The Mouse) and enjoys growing fruit and managing (?) a brood of cats.

Creative Commons image courtesy of Ano Lobb

Global Compensation Philosophy: One Brand, 31 Flavors

Multinational companies have enough complexities, why add to them? This is a refrain I hear from people who promote “global” programs in which a single tool is used across all regions to help build a corporate culture. For the sake of simplicity, let’s will call this the vanilla plan. In all the years I have been in this industry, I don’t think I have seen a vanilla plan work for more than a couple years. Tons of money can be spent in design and communication, but global markets, regulatory changes, management goals and other factors all change too fast to allow any long-term traction to this type of program.

I prefer a more flexible concept where everyone gets a similar tool. You can build in variations on the theme to ensure everyone gets something that works for their needs.  Let’s call this the 31 flavor program. Everyone gets ice cream, but there are enough flavors to keep nearly anyone happy. Some flavors are always available and in use, while other flavors are traded out as seasons and tastes change. These programs allow better alignment with current rules and an easier path for making modifications to meet future changes.

Some companies claim to have these programs, but when you look closer they actually just have many different variations of vanilla. Handling these multi-vanilla programs is nearly as difficult as those with many flavors, but without the added flexibility.

Obviously, there are tons of reasons to stay away from 31 flavor plans, but few of them are based on the fact that they don’t work. Administration can be a real issue, but systems are getting better everyday. Communication, though, is not a valid argument. In fact, designing programs to better fit local norms can allow for a far more streamlined and effective communication effort.

Company A decides to roll out equity around the world. They read that RSUs (Restricted Stock Units)are fairly easy to get approved in most countries and design a typical US-style program with units vesting annually over three years. They roll out this plan around the world without regard for average tenure of employees in different locations. They work to create competitive global market differentials, but don’t put much research into the tools and associated features their non-US competitors are using to deliver those pay levels. They spend a ton of time and money explaining how the program works, why the international employees have a plan that does not take advantage of their local tax-qualified plans and how the plan is designed to motivate and retain them for the future. Employees get similar pay offers from competitors with tax advantaged plans, or plans that simply fit their cultural norms and key players slowly drift out the door.

Company B spends a bit more time working to create a more flexible framework. Not only does the plan allow for multiple variations of features on RSUs, but they also offer locally tax-qualified sub-plans in locations with large enough, or critical enough, populations. The plans are communicated by combined teams of professionals from the corporate headquarters and locals with experience and expertise in the specific plans and local culture. Employees see no reason to leave as long as the company performs, because both their pay levels and delivery mechanisms are competitive. More importantly, they can understand the programs and talk to friends or colleagues who have similar compensation. As rules change, headquarters stays updated via the local players. Changes are made when needed and desired employees become long-term team members.

Yes, the examples above are simplified. Of course, there are implementation and administrative costs associated with the 31 flavor approach. But imagine if you walked into a store that sold only ice cream and when you looked into the freezers you saw tub after tub of slightly off-white vanilla ice cream. No matter how great it tasted, you wouldn’t want to come back often. Most importantly, its unlikely you would ever recommend the place to your ice-cream loving friends.

Dan Walter is the President and CEO of Performensation an independent compensation consultant focused on the needs of small and mid-sized public and private companies. Dan’s unique perspective and expertise includes equity compensation, executive compensation, performance-based pay and talent management issues. Dan is a co-author of “The Decision Makers Guide to Equity Compensation”, “If I’d Only Know That”, “GEOnomics 2011” and “Equity Alternatives.” Dan is on the board of the National Center for Employee Ownership, a partner in the ShareComp virtual conferences and the founder of Equity Compensation Experts, a free networking group. Dan is frequently requested as a dynamic and humorous speaker covering compensation and motivation topics. Connect with him on LinkedIn or follow him on Twitter at @Performensation and @SayOnPay.

The Oops! Factor

Can you recall an instance at work where you made a mistake, an error in judgment, a bad decision?  An "oh cripes!" moment that you would have liked to have had back again?  Perhaps it was a rash decision, a lapse in sound thinking, or simply poor planning that caused you to take a wrong step.  And if you were unlucky, that error was noticed far and wide.

You remember how you felt then, don't you?  You were likely embarrassed, surprised or even angry.  Certainly you felt awkward that you had messed up and that people had noticed.  To cap it off the wrong people had noticed, hadn't they? 

Bet you won't do that again!

Perhaps not, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't stick out your neck again.  Turtles don't make for good leaders.

Because when we make a mistake and learn from it, when we use a negative experience to help us prepare for the next opportunity, we grow as professionals - as individuals and as leaders.  That painful lesson will be more deeply embedded in our consciousness because of the fact that we did screw up, made a bad decision or used poor judgment.  It's human nature for us to remember our foibles, and because of that to hopefully not repeat where we had burned our fingers.

If we were risk adverse and played it safe throughout our career, if we avoided decisions, kept our head down, didn't stretch ourselves, we'd likely never fly high.  We'd also never be noticed by the higher ups and our career would never quite get us where we wanted to go.

No pain, no gain?

If you use your mistakes as a learning experience, what would you learn if you never make a mistake?  Your ego would swell with self-importance and what had been healthy self-confidence would've morphed into over-confidence.  You'd start reading your own press releases, and on that pathway lies a steep cliff followed by a fall.

I remember my father telling me, "at least try."  That's good advice for managers too.

So take a calculated risk.  Not a roll of the dice, but a decision or an action based on your knowledge and experience.  Use your professional judgment and put a stake in the ground.  Stand up for something.  Learn from the experience.  And if you stumble, pick yourself up again and get back in the fray.  Just don't make the same mistake twice.

While most companies talk about the advantages of risk taking, many don't walk the talk.  Instead, some organizations simply get rid of those who had the misfortune to make a mistake.  In that environment there's always someone trying to trip you up (passive resistance, nay-sayers, the overly critical, etc.), or to take advantage when you stumble (enter the political animal).  All of which sends a powerful message that risks are only entertained when in fact they aren't risks at all.

On the other hand, creativity and innovation are fostered in an environment that nurtures decision-making and encourages measured risks as a method of stretching oneself.  Instead of killing the risk-taker when they stumble such organizations seek to stretch the capabilities of their employees by encouraging them to do more than they thought themselves capable. 

It's only a risk if there's a chance of failure.  Employees who are not afraid of making decisions, of standing up for themselves, of taking a risk for the good of the organization - they should be valued, not criticized or penalized.

In an atmosphere free of threats and traps the leader can emerge and thrive - to the betterment of the company and the employees. 

Chuck Csizmar CCP is founder and Principal of CMC Compensation Group, providing global compensation consulting services to a wide variety of industries and non-profit organizations.  He is also associated with several HR Consulting firms as a contributing consultant.  Chuck is a broad based subject matter expert with a specialty in international and expatriate compensation.  He lives in Central Florida (near The Mouse) and enjoys growing fruit and managing (?) a brood of cats.

Creative Commons image courtesy of Leeks

The Best of the Compensation Café 2012 – A Holiday Gift from Us to You

Each year the crew at the Comp Café writes about 200 articles on all things compensation. Many of them are actually pretty darned good. In this spirit, each Café writer has selected a favorite post of 2012. Some were read widely and shared throughout the industry, others are hidden gems you may have missed when they were first posted. Here’s your chance to have a little thought-provoking, cheeky, holiday reading while you wait for reindeer hooves upon your roof. These are some of the best from the best compensation writing team in the business (or one of the best) (maybe around the median?) (nah, we’ll go with the “BEST”). Enjoy and get inspired for a 2013.

Ann Bares: Rewards & Gamification: New Frontier or Next Big Fad?

Used to be that the notion of playing games at work meant sneaking in a hand of Solitaire during a slow moment.  Now gaming is drawing attention as a way to connect people to reward programs and focus them on goal achievement.  Is this the new frontier of engagement or just the next fad?

Jim Brennan: The Compensation Cookbook

Bowing to the unceasing demands of compensation people for a one-stop source of all the secrets of the trade, E. James (Jim) Brennan dedicated his April 1 article to breaking news about the forthcoming Compensation Cookbook from the renowned author H.R. Screwtape.  The Compensation Cookbook is expected to be the last word on 21^st Century state of the art in the field of total rewards.  Readers are encouraged to place their advance orders as soon as possible.

Chuck Csizmar: Balancing Comp 101 with the Workplace

The contribution you can make to your organization is in blending technical knowledge (the how-to) with seasoning and experience to understand what will work for your organization, considering culture and management bias.  Technical knowledge will give you the same answer every time, but knowing how to use that knowledge like a craftsman’s tool to aid in achieving business objectives – that's the key to success as a Compensation professional.

Derek Irvine: You Can Never Give Too Much Recognition

One question I’m often asked is, “Can’t you recognize too much or too often? Doesn’t that water down the effect and impact of recognition?” My answer is nearly always to ask another question, “Have you ever received too much recognition?” The answer is invariably, “No.” Find out why in this post (including why the new Wreck-It Ralph animated movie is on my must-see list).

Margaret O’Hanlon: Your Comp Program Speaks for Itself. Are You Comfortable with That?

It’s tough to be candid with yourself about pay-for-performance practices. This article starts with vignettes from a few companies that don’t realize that they are stumbling. When managers don’t identify high performers accurately (because they prefer to reward their favorites), they don’t realize they’re throwing cold water on productivity and creativity. Most companies can’t afford to stumble these days. Q1 is a great time to both make resolutions and actually start work on them. Here are issues that you can, and should, address in your own backyard to sharpen the focus on results at the same time that you manage the numbers.

Laura Schroeder: Moneyball

Companies tend to overvalue top talent and undervalue everyone else. Assembling a team based on the ‘best’ people you can get for your money isn’t a winning strategy unless money is no object, and even then it’s questionable. This post discusses how the right B team can kick the A team’s butt and how that fact can impact hiring, rewards and performance.

Stephanie Thomas: The Compensation Function is Evolving

This was the Cafe's first infographic – proof that we are evolving right along with the profession. Creating visually stimulating translations of data can be challenging, but the results speak for themselves. It’s great to see that most comp pros (at least those included in the survey) are on the right track. - they recognize the importance of communication and consistency, and are moving toward refinement and specificity. I think this can only improve the compensation function.

Jacque Vilet: Out With Metrics ---- In With Analytics!  

I feel strongly that when compensation decisions are made, Compensation professionals need to use analytics that look toward the future rather than metrics that focus on the past.  The use of analytics will allow Compensation to more closely align a total rewards strategy with the company’s business strategy --- and that’s Compensation’s most important responsibility.

Dan Walter: Is it Time to Change the Equity Compensation Paradigm?

I love equity compensation, but am not currently enamored with how it is being used. This is the starting point for a discussion on how to best evolve equity compensation. The instruments, vesting schedules and stated goals for most of these plans have changed very little over the past 20 years. While people are naturally resistant to change, we are also supremely adaptable. What can we do to restore the purpose and luster to these programs?

Note: to see more from any of the Compensation Cafe writers simply copy and paste their name into the search field on the left. We bet you will find some additional articles that will make your “best” list for 2012.

All the best,

The Compensation Café

(And a special "thank you" from the Editor to Dan, who took time out of a busy year-end schedule to coordinate and compile this gift to our readers.)

Yes, Boss

One of the most negative management stereotypes you'll come across is the image of the "yes-man," that weak-kneed subordinate who is always quick to agree with the boss.   This is the empty suit having no other opinion than what's expected.  Can you picture the nodding head and vacant smile?

Do you recall the old saying, "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil"?  The modern version of this adage describes one who willfully turns a blind eye, refuses to acknowledge and even feigns ignorance when confronted with activities they should otherwise say or do something about.

Do the compensation professionals you deal with, including the one looking at you from the mirror, provide objective and unbiased counsel to management, or do they simply offer support and justification for what management wants to do?

Do you stand up?

There are always opportunities for compensation professionals to turn a blind eye / closed mouth to improper practices taking place in their organization:

• Finance has lobbied Senior Management that the average merit increase next year should be x%, and you've been asked for your recommendation.

• The performance appraisal process is poorly handled and rewards are often granted without legitimate justification.

• A Vice President wants to create an Office Manager title for a long serving Secretary.  This would also entail a higher grade and promotional increase.

Are you one to stand up and be counted, or do you let these events wash over you without voicing concern?

• Do you provide Senior Management with an unbiased recommendation, based on competitive research and an understanding of compensation strategy?

• Do you question those managers who wish to grant increases / bonuses for the wrong reasons?

• Do you strive to hold the line on meaningless titles that increase costs, create employee equity issues and provide the company with little or no ROI?

What's the worst that can happen?

Are you concerned that having an opinion out of step with senior management will damage your "team player" image?  That your career would suffer because you can't get along with others, that you "don't get it"?  Do you find it easier to get along with everyone and ride the tide, wherever it takes you?

Professionals should give the best advice they're capable of providing, on the basis of technical knowledge, experience and seasoning with business operations.  Let management make the decision.  They have a perspective that's wider than a singular compensation view, and it’s their company, budget, operations, etc.  Your responsibility is to provide the best objective advice possible, to ensure that decision-makers have their eyes open and understand the ramifications involved.

Life isn't a tableau of  black-and-white images, but a series of swirling grays.  We should acknowledge that there are contingencies and alternative possibilities available.  But we should not temper either our judgment or our opinions on the basis of what the boss wants to hear.

Management tends to respect straightforward analysis and honest feedback.  However they won’t respect your input if it’s been tainted by political maneuverings or a “how many ways are there to say yes”? mentality.

Your mantra: I will add value

You don't have to fall on your sword career-wise to make a point, to stand up for yourself, to add value to the decision-making process.  Sometimes you just know the direction management is taking, no matter the facts surrounding the issue.  While leadership may be plagued with personal biases that often trump rational analysis, that doesn't mean that you should step away from doing your job.

One of the best ways to establish yourself as a valuable contributor is to have an opinion, and not be afraid to voice it.  Even when the management steamroller is moving and you have to get out of the way or be run over, you should always provide your professional input.   You can do this by providing options and alternatives, multiple courses of action for management to consider.  That's where you'll be able to present your own recommendations alongside the favored management point-of-view.

Get them thinking; that's your responsibility and how you add professional value.  It's also how you build credibility and an invaluable personal awareness with Senior Management.

Chuck Csizmar CCP is founder and Principal of CMC Compensation Group, providing global compensation consulting services to a wide variety of industries and non-profit organizations.  He is also associated with several HR Consulting firms as a contributing consultant.  Chuck is a broad based subject matter expert with a specialty in international and expatriate compensation.  He lives in Central Florida (near The Mouse) and enjoys growing fruit and managing (?) a brood of cats.

Creative Commons image courtesy of allyaubry