Bob - I've got to say I agree with you. I am a huge proponent of pay for performance and have seen it executed quite successfully in a number of instances.
The key to a successful implementation is the cooperative development of clearly defined, easily measured performance metrics and goals. You cannot tie a compensation plan like this to overall company performance. I mean, just how much impact does a single employee have on ALL factors that tie into profitability (as a group we all do, but stay with me here...)
Tie performance pay to something truly within the employee's control that does impact operations. At Res, for example, attendance, availability, calls per hour, call monitoring, etc, can all be tied together to form the basis of a "bonus" pay plan. This bonus should not be a small component of pay, but rather a sizable chunk of overall compensation. The better you do, the more you make.
In short, every position in the company should start to consider which metrics they impact and how those metrics affect the overall health of the company.
What's great about a good implementation like this, is that employees can track their progress and take action to improve their own pay.
I don't know what the union implications to something like this would be, but I'd be grateful to hear from someone about them.
Apparently perfect attendance doesn't mean sh== on the front line. Some people don't even have to call in and still get to keep their job. )(for whatever reason. Doesn't matter after all.)
Pay them sh==, It is just a body and a number after all.
Got it!!!
Flip side, "Pay for performance"? That would be personal in nature and it would be up to a managers individual
perception of what another employee is worth, hence creating bias, if not according to company terms. You are opening up a whole Ugliness that is not standardized, because people are indeed individuals and you are relying on another human being to rate that individual, of course, with no credentials, and no rating system.
Your manager could be a psyco for all you know, and that is just OK?
You are assuming "warm and fuzzy, they know what they are doing" etc.
My experience is that they are human. I just pray for the same respect.
However, I doubt it.
From experience. I say.
Apparently perfect attendance doesn't mean sh== on the front line. Some people don't even have to call in and still get to keep their job. )(for whatever reason. Doesn't matter after all.)
Pay them sh==, It is just a body and a number after all.
Got it!!!
Flip side, "Pay for performance"? That would be personal in nature and it would be up to a managers individual
perception of what another employee is worth, hence creating bias, if not according to company terms. You are opening up a whole Ugliness that is not standardized, because people are indeed individuals and you are relying on another human being to rate that individual, of course, with no credentials, and no rating system.
Your manager could be a psyco for all you know, and that is just OK?
You are assuming "warm and fuzzy, they know what they are doing?" etc.
My experience is that they are human. I just pray for the same respect.
However, I doubt it.
From experience. I say.