To contact us Click HERE
If you haven't read The Wisdom of Crowds, by James Surowiecki, you owe yourself the treat. It's fascinating. The main premise is to show how our collective wisdom just plain crushes the expertise of even the highest-paid gurus, at least over the long-haul.
Surowiecki also explores a number of side-issues, and he does it in the engaging style of the journalist-author, reminiscent of another of my favorite authors, Malcolm Gladwell, author of Tipping Point and Outliers.
It's down one of these thought-alleyways I'd like to take you now. Surowiecki touched on something that has been eating at me for a while now. Perhaps it bugs you as well - or if it didn't before, I hope it starts to now. He writes,
"Companies tend to pay people based on whether they do what they're expected to do. In a market, people get paid based simply on what they do. After all, your local deli owner doesn't make any more money if his sales at year end beat his own expectations. He just makes as much money as he makes. Ideally, the same would be true inside a company."
I founded my own company, and I owned all the stock: typical of many SMBs. That means when we made a sale, I got to keep every dime of the money left over after we'd paid all the bills - just like that hypothetical deli owner. Granted, I paid myself meagerly and invested heavily back into the business, but I was investing profits: some entrepreneurs buy boats and beach homes; I bought staff salaries and a cutting-edge website.
The experience has left an indelible mark on how I think about business, large and small. It kills me when companies play games with money, or with motivation, as if incenting people for desired behavior rather than results makes any kind of sense. As if paying people the same for disparate performance in the same role is anything but... um... dumb.
Many roles in business support the organization and thus are hard to measure in direct impact to the bottom line. I get that, and I respect it. But here's one that has never made a lick of sense to me: when two people perform the same role, but one outshines the other - in terms of measurable dollar-in-revenue amounts - and yet is paid the same, or close to it.
Take innovation. One of your research teams invents your company's version of the sticky pad (3M) or the iPad (Apple). That breakthrough becomes a major part of your firm's revenue for years to come. To my mind, as that deli owner, this team is one hell of a lot more valuable to the company than the other teams. Perhaps they deserve a pass on their annual reviews for the rest of their careers. Just sayin'.
Or the IT professional who guides his firm away from an unhealthy relationship with an under-performing vendor, and ends up saving her company not only millions of dollars a year with a new vendor, but also headache and "fit" issues that might be a lot harder to measure objectively. Has this pro earned some job security? A bonus? A promotion? It's remarkable to me how often that type of recognition doesn't happen. What would the deli owner say?
And here's my favorite: I saved it for last on purpose. Look at how you pay and manage your sales professionals. Every year, sales pros are given their "number," the target they need to hit in order to stay employed. They beat their number, they earn commissions, bonuses, gifts, vacations... They miss it, they're in trouble. Maybe even sacked.
Now, so far so good; fair's fair you say, and I agree. But anyone involved in sales knows, what most companies do is say, "Okay Bob, last year you sold $X, so we know you can do better next year. Jan, last year you sold half of $X, so you have to beat half of $X next year."
Over my career, I have known plenty of sales pros and team managers at a variety of companies that have been in a situation like this: Bob sells twice, three times, four times as much as Jan, but he misses his number and she exceeds hers. Jan is a heroine, and Bob is in trouble - yes, perhaps even fired for under-performance.
Really? Really. This may make sense in enterprises around the world, but I wonder... What would the deli owner think of that? One waitress handles four times the number of tables, brings in four times the sales, of her coworkers: isn't she worth more? Isn't she the very last to lose her job? My God, most sensible business owners would marry her in order to keep that money in the family!
In my humble opinion,* perhaps CEOs and boards of directors can learn a thing or two from the humble deli owner. Perhaps hitting one's number should be less important than, say, bringing a company actual money.
*Okay, I admit, my opinion is only occasionally humble. I'd say sorry, but I'm not.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder