|
Good morning!
In recognition of my dogged support of the New
England
Patriots since their early days, my brother Dick for
Christmas
gave me The Education of a
Coach, David
Halberstam's
insightful book about Patriots' coach Bill Belichick and
his dad. I
read it over that weekend instead of writing
Christmas cards
and ever since have been thinking off and on about
individual
versus team incentives as my clients try to tailor
their 2006
bonus programs to make their companies winners.
Gain-sharing, management by objectives, and even
profit-sharing concepts may wax and wane, but
there are some
basics to keep in mind...
Best regards,

Bradlee T. Howe
Financial Managers Trust
|
The New Deal
"Wow! That was more like it," said Annie as we left
the
Skywalk on the 50th floor of the Prudential Tower
last Friday
night. "That party had some high energy going for it.
Those
people must really have had a good year!"
My wife had listened to the company CEO toast the
staff of 40
for "the best year ever" in its 20-year history as the
champagne glasses were passed around prior to the
surf 'n turf
dinner. And she had heard the buzz as people table-
hopped
introducing spouses and other guests to their co-
workers,
the camaraderie fueling a strong start for the
New Year.
In contrast, three weeks earlier we had attended
another
weekend holiday party in a side room off the
manufacturing floor of a different client. The
employees and
guests were equally well-dressed, the food and drink
equally
plentiful, but the attendees were broken into small
knots of
people--segregated, it turned out, by work groups.
The party
lacked cohesion; the total group wasn't unified.
Despite the
best efforts of two musicians, the spark was
missing. It
was hard to believe that the second company was
also finishing
the best year in its four decades, one year after one
of its
worst years ever.
The difference? The first company was a
team
— well-integrated, mutually supportive, jointly
committed to a very positive top and bottom line,
feeling
rewarded by their party venue, and very much aware
that
a further reward would show up in their January
paychecks. The second group functions largely as
autonomous
workers at individual work stations, each
contributing a
discrete operation, but having no stake beyond
the weekly
paycheck. They may have gone from worst to first,
winning the
industry Super Bowl in 2005, but the view from the
side room
looks like the same old sandlot to most of them.
To his credit, the owner of the second company,
Mark (not his
real name) is fully aware that his corporate culture
breeds
skepticism, if not cynicism, about management's
efforts to
improve productivity, to develop teams, to integrate
work flow.
The forty men on the floor have seen sales increase
by 50%
while the paychecks for the old hands have actually
declined
— additional personnel and newer, more
productive
equipment have reduced overtime. Mark is more
than
willing to share the rewards, but only if it will change
behavior,
improving individual commitment and productivity.
As I think of the continuum of employee incentive
systems that my clients have initiated over the
years,
at opposite ends of the pole are a) individualized
incentives in which people are rewarded based on a
specific set
of metrics and b) group incentives which result from
the
performance of the entire company. Within this
lies a
broad spectrum of gradations involving objective and
subjective
measures, contingency payouts, relative vs. absolute
performance, participatory vs. top-down goal-
setting, etc.
In my experience, good incentive plans are
characterized
by seven essentials:
- Incentives which reward positive behavior
and
outcomes in the context of overall company
goals
— for the individual, for the work group,
and/or for the
company. The standard job with the standard
effort
gets the standard paycheck. The bonus is for
achievement above and beyond the standard.
- The more immediate the reward, the more
committed
the action. Owners and top managers may take
the long
view of strategy and compensation, but the time
horizon for
many of those who turn out day-to-day product is
next week's
check.
- Some contribution to, if not control, of the
outcome.
Without this, the employee has little reason to
change.
Education is critical to everyone's understanding of
how he/she
contributes to the whole.
- Keeping it simple. The more conditions
that are
attached to the reward structure, the more likely
people are to
try to "game" the system. And it can drive a
controller nuts
trying to keep track of multiple permutations.
- Regular status reports. People want to
know the
score. Are we making it or not? How am I doing?
Most
importantly, what's the likelihood of a payoff, soon?
- A continuous feedback loop to evaluate how
the
system is working. If it's not producing the
desired effect,
scrap it. Incentive programs are a two-way street:
when you
establish the bonus formula, make sure there's a
quid pro
quo and be doubly sure that you retain final
discretion
regarding disbursement.
- Prompt payout. There's nothing more
deflating
for an employee to hear than "You've earned it, but
we can't
afford to pay it right now."
Mark's management team has decided to scrap
the old
bonus structure, which was based on achieving
monthly
production and revenue targets. Too many critical
elements
were simply out of the control of the work group.
Instead,
they've gone back to the basics: "when the tide
comes in, all
the ships go up."
Having enlisted my help to educate the staff
about "what
happens to the profits," the owner has
committed 20% of
the "free cash" (see sidebar) in 2006 to a bonus
pool
which, with a repeat of 2005, should be equivalent to
three or
four weekly paychecks for everyone on the staff.
When that happens, they'll be making their own
music at
the 2006 holiday party, perhaps even with a better
window on
the world.
|
Alligator Bites
"Cash-based incentive pay plans are supposed to
accomplish
two major goals. One, obviously, is to motivate
employees. The
other is to turn a corporation's largest single fixed
cost
— payroll — into a partly variable cost
that can
float up and down with the fortunes of the business.
It is well
established that such plans often fail at the first task
if they are
too vague…
"According to 'The Knowledge of Pay Study: E-mails
from the
Frontline,' a 2002 survey published by WorldatWork of more
than 6,000 managers and employees at 26
organizations, only
24 percent of employees agree that their cash bonus
plans
actually change their behavior. Sibson Consulting
senior vice
president Peter LeBlanc, who conducted the study,
thinks that if
salespeople and executives (who typically are highly
attuned to
incentive pay) were excluded from that group, that
percentage
would drop even further.
"Moreover, few employees actually understand how
their pay
and performance are connected; only 28 percent say
they know
the size of their bonus 'well before it is paid.' Indeed,
even
'right before it is paid,' 41 percent of employees do
not know
the amount. 'In other words, there is too much
discretion in the
eyes of employees,' sums up LeBlanc. The only way
cash bonus
plans work, he adds, is if they are transparent.
That
means employees must understand exactly how
performance
— both theirs and the company's —
translates
into dollars on their paychecks, and they need
frequent
updates." [emphasis added]
— Tim Reason, a staff writer, published in
CFO
Magazine
|
About Us
Financial Managers helps the managers of smaller
companies and non-profit organizations develop
reliable financial information for operational
decisions.
On an affordable retainer basis, FM serves as
the
part-time controller and senior financial manager for
multiple clients, leading them to profitability and
positive cash flow.
The goal is for the organization
to outgrow Financial Manager's services, at which
time FM will take the lead in identifying and hiring the
right full-time financial person for the firm, and effect
a smooth transition to his or her management.
|
Financial Managers Trust
781-799-5737 | FAX 781-788-9794
PO Box 2 Lexington MA 02420
PO Box 1527 Fort Myers FL 33902
www.finman.com
To read our privacy policy click here. © 2006 Financial Managers Trust. All rights reserved.
Newsletter developed by Blue Penguin Development
|
 |
|
EMAIL SUBSCRIPTION
|
 |
Enter your e-mail address here to subscribe to "Howe's Bayou."
|
 |
DRAINING THE SWAMP
|
 |
|
It's critically important to be able to fund the
pay-out of
performance rewards on a timely basis.
Occasionally,
especially in the midst of rapid growth, the need for
working
capital increases in order to fund rising inventory
and/or
receivables. This, in turn, simply sucks up cash
generated by
operating profits. And cash surpluses attributable to
depreciation may be paying down equipment loans or
servicing
other debt.
Before you commit to that bonus plan which is over
and above
your regular budget for wages and salaries, push
the
numbers just a bit further to see if you'll have the
cash to pay
for your success. As I outlined to client number
two (see
main article), he needs to know what his total
obligation will be
to repay principal on his bank loans in 2006, and he
needs to
have a good idea of what he'll be committing from
internal
cash (not from more bank loans) to purchase new
equipment.
Repayments of debt principal plus capital purchases
are
uses of cash outside of the normal
operating
budget. At a basic level, they are offset by operating
profit and
depreciation as sources of cash.
Thus,
the first use of profit is for debt and
internally-financed
equipment.
So what level of profit do we need before we start
seeing "free
cash" to apply to incentive payouts? The equation
looks like
this:
(Principal payments on debt) + (unfunded capital
equipment purchases) - (total depreciation and
amortization
expense) = profit-sharing baseline.
In my client's case:
$300,000 + $50,000 - $228,000 = $122,000 (profit-
sharing
baseline).
Anything above $122,000 should be available, in part,
to the
bonus pool.
|
 |
PREVIOUS NEWSLETTERS
|
 |
|