dsrtao: dsr as a LEGO minifig (Default)
[personal profile] dsrtao
[this has absolutely nothing to do with the company I work for, except that it started me thinking about raises]

The components of a raise are:

  • performance evaluation: has your value to the company increased?
  • economic adjustment: the dollar is worth less than it was last time around
  • market adjustment: would it be rational for you to accept the transition costs involved in finding a new job? Would it be rational for your employer to replace you?


All of these are essentially historical. Forward-looking compensation should essentially be in two categories:

  • Job change adjustment: you're going to be doing something new, the pay should be renegotiated.
  • Incentive reward: in exchange for reaching certain (clearly defined!) goals, money is promised for the future.


Have I missed anything?

Golden handcuffs

Date: 2008-09-29 10:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sml.livejournal.com
You cover it a little bit in market adjustment, but raises are often used as an incentive to make sure the person doesn't feel they can get better pay elsewhere. Forward thinking, that piece is critical part of compensation.

There are some companies that base their whole compensation strategy on that one point. A huge investment is made in finding, training, and socializing people. A loss of a key team member is difficult to replace.

(I don't deal with compensation or compensation strategies at my current employment, so I am speculating here)

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 10:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] goldsquare.livejournal.com
Depending upon your purpose, there are also types of reward: raise, bonus, incentive, non-monetary compensation, and so forth.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 02:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] goldsquare.livejournal.com
Bonus is backwards looking ("Good job this year: have a check") and an incentive is forward looking ("If you can do all 3 impossible things, you can have a check").

Also consider profit-sharing in the mix, for whatever that might be worth.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 11:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jtdiii.livejournal.com
You are also presuming a company wants to remain at the top of the salary band.

In fact many companies will hire near the top and then award raises at below average rates in the proven belief that once someone is settled in they will not look at the prevailing rates, or be willing to leave unless there is a major discrepancy.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 03:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] metahacker.livejournal.com
The vast majority of people I know are unhappy at their job. This points to a widespread rash of this.

From a capitalist perspective, salaries are generally set at "the lowest number we can give you that won't cause you to leave". This is well below "the lowest number at which you will join the company"...

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 11:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jtdiii.livejournal.com
Check out the average defense contractor... more like 15-20.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 11:35 am (UTC)
ext_58972: Mad! (Default)
From: [identity profile] autopope.livejournal.com
You're looking at it from the employees point of view.

That's not the right outlook. You need to think yourself into management's shoes.

* Is the employees' contribution to the bottom line such that they're not trivially replaceable and their loss would impair your division's operation? (This may also depend on external hiring conditions ...)

* Are you being squeezed for efficiency improvements from up top?

* Would the money available for handing out rewards be better spent on hiring extra hands, or transferring to the "profit" column of the balance sheet?

* Do you care about employee morale?

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-29 01:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] its-just-me.livejournal.com
I have with my 2.0 annual raise for the past six years been gaining a drastic pay cut.
Page generated Aug. 18th, 2025 11:57 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios