A Pebble In Your Shoe

For as long as I've worked in Human Resources the common solution most often suggested by all ranks and segments of the population for a host of employee issues was to simply . . . pay more.

Yep, just push that EASY button of simplistic, no-thought, one-size-fits-all logic, and like a snake oil concoction sold by con artists the promise was that you'd start feeling better tomorrow.  Or as soon as those making the promises have gotten safely out of town.

Why is it that some people always think that the reason behind almost every employee issue is that the pay is wrong?  Simple and uncomplicated reasoning, I suppose.  Just the way we like to solve our problems.  Therefore the logical and easy-to-understand solution is to pay more.

Like a pebble caught in your shoe, all you have to do is flick your problem(s) away.

Life is More Than A + B = C

Sometimes though, you really need to look beyond the simplistic to find the REAL problem.  Placing band aids on symptoms will not be a cure-all for what ails you.  Instead, by masking the hurt you might be making things worse by focusing in the wrong direction.  Really harmful problems need time to fester before they erupt into crisis, so band aids often become misguided placebos to make one think that things are getting better.  Or will soon.

When managers complain about a sales incentive system, the answer could be the compensation.  It could also be territory size, unreasonable targets, poor product quality, administrative errors, inadequate training, etc.  It isn't always about pay.

When turnover statistics worsen, the organization's supposed low pay becomes the "kicking boy" for why employees have left.  However studies have consistently shown that to be a false logic, which if left unchallenged could direct attention away from the real problem.

Many of my clients have assumed that their problem was pay; that they should be improving pay in some fashion.  But that isn't always the case.  In fact, more often than not the problem isn't pay.  However, using pay as an easy target of complaint is simple to explain, offers the chance of "more for me" and often succeeds in getting employees and even senior management to mindlessly nod their heads.  Because perhaps they don't want to dig a little bit deeper.  Perhaps they just want the immediate problem to go away - and they think that more pay would do just that.  No fuss, no muss.

Wrong.

The Ease of Chasing a Distraction

Many times pointing the finger at pay is serving up a distraction for those whose primary interest is in dealing with a quick fix.  It's similar to a dictator who risks war with a neighboring country simply to hide the fact that their own economy is near collapse.  Illusionists call it a sleight of hand.  Those using this practice will have you looking at everything and everywhere but where the real culprit is - or should be.

So when your foot hurts, don't rush to throw out your shoes.  Think about it.  Maybe it's only a pebble that could easily be removed.  But maybe the problem isn't what you think it is.  Maybe it isn't what you want it to be.  Maybe the problem is more ingrained within the organization, more complex and doesn't offer a quick fix solution.  

To make things right maybe you'll have to conduct some research, spend a little time considering possible ramifications, unintended consequences and roll-on effects.   So talk to affected employees, gather a wider perspective from those closest to the sore points, delve into the weeds, get behind the symptoms and understand the root causes. 

Because offering more incentive dollars to the sales force when quotas are unreasonable isn't going to get you anywhere.

So don't simply kick the can of problems down the road, because that can will roll to a stop and you’ll be facing the same challenges again and again. Problems will not go away by themselves.  Instead, if left ignored they tend to worsen.  And if your quick-fix solution addresses only a symptom and not the real problem, then you're wasting time and money while what really ails you will fester and grow ever more difficult to resolve.

You may think that your problem is like a pesky little pebble in your shoe.  Have a care that you could be seriously wrong.

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 clowder of cats.

Creative Commons image, "Stony Lonely Shoe," by Mark Michaells

Comments

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

You are right about that "easy" choice, Chuck. Blaming pay converts the problem from a management issue that requires work to fix into a cost expense item, instead. Writing a check is easier than diagnosing and correcting a failed system.

As said before http://www.compensationcafe.com/2010/08/first-you-eliminate-pay-as-the-solution.html, it is ironic that you need compensation experts to prove pay is NOT the solution before most managers are willing to tackle the real causes.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Whoops... sorry... that link should not contain a comma but should be http://www.compensationcafe.com/2010/08/first-you-eliminate-pay-as-the-solution.html.

[Chris Dobyns]

Yes, too often I think this devolves into a "can't see the forest for the trees" syndrome. I've lost track of how many times someone articulated a problem as "pay", and the problem really turned out to be: crappy supervisor, lumpy desk chair, mean co-workers, constantly blowing A/C vents, etc. - or a combination of one or all of the above (well, hopefully not ALL of the above).

Implementing the wrong solution (pay) will only marginally "shift" the disaffected employee to now being the modestly better paid, disaffected employee. Awesome.

[Tony Bergmann-Porter]

All true and all fair.

But in my experience, nobody EVER changed jobs for less money.I think of it as the risk premium one requires for the leap from DsubK to DsubDK. Shazbut! Now that I think about it, there's probably a PhD dissertation tucked away in there....

You (collectively) may have other experiences, about which I'd love to hear.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Well, Tony, I have seen people change jobs for less cash, especially when other total reward elements like boss or career prospects were terrible and the "less money" was still quite substantial. But Chuck never implied that his "pebble" issues were created by low pay. Yes, almost everyone can find someone willing to out-pay their last employer, but they don't start seeking that better job only because of pay... that's just the politically correct and professionally sensible perfect excuse (http://www.compensationcafe.com/2015/03/money-is-the-best-excuse-for-quitting.html).

His key point is that more pay is not a universal solution to management problems.

[Chris Dobyns]

Yikes! Only just seeing some of this final feedback for the first time. Figured at a minimum, I needed to cite at least one instance for Tony, so that he can forever in the future, say he knows of a situation where someone changed jobs for less money.

This is a little awkward, since the example I was going to cite, is me. When I joined by current employer, back in early 2002, I was motivated by the events of 9/11 and for the opportunity to "give back". Consequently, when I joined the federal workforce, I did take a small cut in pay (<10%). Now I was highly motivated back then (and now), and I quickly replaced that small reduction, and have advanced quickly over the last ten years.

Think this underscores that for the highly-motivated (or the highly-hopeless), a reduction in pay associated with a change in jobs is not completely outside the realm of the possible.

And at least now, Tony can cite one example.

[Karen Kervick]

I have also heard of instances of accepting a lower total compensation package for the challenge of a new position.

Again living in my perfect world, at a certain point money plateaus as a motivator and the opportunity and challenges to do something new or different actually is the motivator.

That being said, I wholeheartedly agree with Chuck's assessment. We just had a case of providing a promotion and increase to a manager this year in recognition of added responsibilities and within 6 months she was gone to a new job. Sometimes it's just time for an employee to move on. At best you can make that happen within your organization so there isn't a complete knowledge drain. At worst, they leave and you create an opportunity for someone else....possibly at a lower pay rate which in turn opens up other opportunities...

To every season, turn, turn, turn,
there is a time to pay and a time to stay.

It's autumn, I am enchanted by the changing leaves...stop and do some leaf peeping today!

[Gina]

Actually I am also of the view that good hard cash is actually the biggest motivation. But I totally agree with your views. There are some problems that you can’t sort out simply by paying more. For example, no amount of commissions or bonuses can justify impossible targets or nonstop pushing.
On a side note, in the picture, it’s more of a rock than pebble in the shoe, maybe one of those problems that you can’t flick away and they keep bogging you down.