It is always the way when Big Bad Boss comes back from a seminar; he gets a rush of enthusiasm for making changes. Well, not so much for making them, but for making me make them. This time he wants me to review the reward strategy. Now as it happens, I love working on reward strategy; I like being out of the detail for once and the word ‘strategy’ makes me feel important. However, I updated it not that long ago and if there is one thing I hate it is rework. It feels as if I made a mistake the first time around. The webinar Big Bad Boss attended was about EU pay transparency and there will be lots more to do on that topic, but for now it is suggested we focus is on our strategy.
For me, the first part of a reward strategy is understanding the organisation’s strategy so that our programmes are aligned to it. Although it is worded differently, our organisation’s strategy could be summarised as ‘make as much money as possible’ and to my knowledge that has not changed. However, to do the job properly, I reach out to a few of the Higher Beings, the senior executive team, to see if they have any feedback. I could have guessed the response. One used this as an opportunity to complain about the car policy, and another thought that the executive benefits could be improved. Ever self-serving, they are incapable of looking beyond their own needs to the bigger picture.
Talent attraction
I think that the purpose of the strategy document is clear: simply to define how we pay employees to attract the best employees, retain key talent and to provide for career progression and development. We also have some key reward principles, in that we aim to provide rewards that are fair, market-driven, inclusive, and open. I stand by the words in the strategy, but the implementation is suspect. The strategy document merely pays lip-service to these ideals.
The market-driven part is important and interesting. We aim to pay at median for pay and benefits. We also talk about pay for performance and state we intend to pay above market on variable pay. This is a nuanced point, but I feel the legislative mood is swinging more towards fairness, and rather away from individualistic performance. I reword this section slightly in the hope it will help fulfil the brief. When it comes to definition of ‘market’, the document is quite clear. We detail the surveys we use and the peer companies we intend to compare to. I notice one stated peer organisation has merged with another on the list, so I update that list too.
In the last update we added a longer section on wellbeing. If I am honest, this is a lot of words, but not a lot of meaning. Yes, we have an employee assistance programme (EAP) and yes, we have wellbeing champions in the organisation, but do the Higher Beings actually care? Hm, I have my doubts, but that is not an easy issue to address.
Recognition is another wordy section. We have a global platform, and I do not see anything that warrants a change. I would hope that gift vouchers are specifically excluded from any new EU pay reporting requirements so this should not be a factor. However, one could very much question how appropriately recognition awards are distributed. I have seen the report by the Higher Beings and I can tell you it is not fair.
We also talk a lot in the strategy about providing training, work experience, and mentoring to enable career progression within the company. While those things do exist, I still see the Higher Beings' favourites getting fast-tracked ahead of others with the same experience. Sigh.
Full transparency
I realise that so far, I have only made little tweaks to our strategy. I decide to take a step back and think about what we might need to do in the light of new transparency legislation. First, we need to be fully transparent about it. So, we need a document that can be clearly articulated at all levels of the organisation. I run through another set of edits to make the document easy to read and understand.
Secondly, we need to make sure that whatever we do is fair and inclusive. We intend for our compensation and benefits programmes to be fair across the organisation, including by gender and other protected categories. I read through the stated objectives to ensure they are robust in the light of expected legislative changes. Of course they are. What happens in practice is another matter.
Things change, so I add a final section on ongoing monitoring and updates. That means that next time I review the document it will be because I decided that should happen, not because of some request from on high. I do like to be master of my own destiny.
Personally, I think the documented strategy is already in good shape, but then I would as I wrote it. Where we are lacking is in the communication. I know from sad experience that employees tend to think anything to do with HR is Machiavellian and that the overall system is specifically geared against them. Perhaps if we more proactively communicate the strategy, it might show there is some method and allay some concerns. I create a short article for inclusion in our employee updates and another for managers to brief their teams.
Short of a crystal ball to tell me the detail to come out of EU pay transparency legislation changes, I think this is the best I can do. Big Bad Boss shares the document with the Higher Beings at the next board meeting. There are no suggested changes but there are a couple of complaints about the car policy. What are they like?
Next time..Candid makes pay transparent
