The significance of enterprise salary management Salary management refers to the remuneration or income paid by an enterprise to employees for the work they have completed or the services they have provided or will provide, which is determined by collective negotiation, agreement or national laws, regulations or policies, and is based on individual labor contracts. In the development and management of human resources in modern enterprises, salary is the most sensitive issue, and whether the salary scheme is reasonable directly affects the realization of enterprise management objectives and the level of employees' work enthusiasm. Designing a reasonable and competitive salary system is a very important job. Salary design is not simply about income, but refers to the rationality, legitimacy and suitability of the salary system. A scientific, systematic and reasonable salary system can effectively stimulate the enthusiasm of employees and mobilize the enthusiasm of workers; The unreasonable salary system will lead to high salary and low efficiency, and high salary will not leave people, which will hinder the development of enterprises and employees. How can an enterprise make employees care about their own salary, make employees get the greatest satisfaction from salary, and then improve the efficiency of the enterprise? The author tries to discuss from the following two aspects.
First, the characteristics of a reasonable salary system
A reasonable salary system of an enterprise should be competitive and stimulating, and generally should have the following characteristics:
1. Pay must be fair, reflecting the principle of more pay for more work.
Salary involves the vital interests of every employee in the enterprise, which is easy to cause dissatisfaction and unfairness of employees. It is very important to embody internal fairness in the design of salary system, which greatly affects the satisfaction and loyalty of employees, their enthusiasm and enterprising spirit, and even their stay. The work enthusiasm and production enthusiasm of enterprise employees are not only affected by their absolute remuneration, but also by their relative remuneration. Employees will compare their own labor remuneration horizontally with the proportion of others, and will also compare their current labor remuneration vertically with their past labor remuneration. The result of the comparison is that if the two proportions are equal, there will be a sense of fairness; If the two ratios are not equal, there will be a sense of injustice. The proportion of return and investment between one person and another person used to compare with him should be balanced. If people feel that their remuneration is not suitable, they may be dissatisfied, reduce the quantity or quality of output, or leave the organization. If people feel that the pay is fair, they may continue to work at the same output level. People may work harder if they think that the individual's return is greater than what they think is fair. The human resources department of an enterprise cannot satisfy all employees at this point, but it must try its best to be fair.
2. Salary embodies the principle of humanization.
When designing salary, enterprises should embody the principle of humanized management, meet the interests of employees, manage people by system and warm people by family. Work that makes employees happy will achieve twice the result with half the effort. Haier Zhang Ruimin once said? In order to let employees have a company in mind, the company must always think of employees; To make employees love the company, the company must first love employees? This is the embodiment of Haier's humanization principle.
Due to the different nature of the work of employees in various positions within the enterprise, the required quality is also different, and the requirements for employees are not the same, so the salary has the characteristics of being suitable for people.
Second, build a reasonable salary system.
The following aspects should be considered when constructing a competitive and incentive salary system.
1, providing competitive salary.
Enterprises should provide employees with competitive salaries, so that they can cherish this job as soon as they enter the enterprise and give full play to their skills. Companies that pay higher wages can attract and retain talents best, especially those excellent employees. It is especially necessary for leading companies in the industry. Higher salary will bring higher satisfaction, followed by lower turnover rate. A well-structured and well-managed performance compensation system should be able to retain excellent employees and eliminate employees with poor performance, even if it requires the company to pay a considerable replacement cost. In addition, enterprise organizations must also reward employees, because this will enable them to serve the enterprise with higher loyalty and better performance. In order to ensure competitive salary, enterprises can refer to the company's salary survey to help ensure that their salary remains competitive in the market.
2. Pay attention to internal rewards.
In fact, compensation can be divided into two categories: external and internal. External salary mainly refers to: money, allowances and promotion opportunities provided by enterprises, as well as recognition from colleagues and superiors. Compared with external rewards, internal rewards are based on the task itself, such as competence, sense of accomplishment, sense of responsibility, attention, influence, personal growth and valuable contribution to work. In fact, for knowledge-based employees, internal compensation has a considerable relationship with employees' job satisfaction. Therefore, enterprise organizations can do a good job in internal compensation through work system, employee influence and human capital flow policy, so that employees can get the greatest satisfaction from the work itself. In this way, the enterprise reduces its dependence on a good salary system, and instead satisfies and promotes employees, making employees more dependent on internal incentives, and also makes the enterprise get rid of the cycle of only relying on money to motivate employees and raising wages again.
3. Implement skill-based compensation.
The evaluation system based on personal skills is to determine the salary of employees according to their abilities, and the salary standard is divided into different levels from the lowest skill to the highest skill. Skills-based systems can bring greater flexibility in changing jobs and introducing new technologies. When employees prove that they are competent for a higher level of work, the salary will naturally increase. In addition, the skill-based compensation system has also changed the management orientation. After the implementation of skill-based compensation, the focus of management is no longer to limit the task allocation to make it consistent with the post level. On the contrary, making full use of employees' existing skills will become a new focus. The biggest advantage of this salary system is that it can send information to let employees pay attention to their own development.
The system is very effective in evaluating professional and technical personnel with strong job skills requirements. The use of this system can, to a certain extent, encourage excellent professionals to work with peace of mind, instead of seeking high-paid but not good management positions, thus reducing the risk of losing excellent technical experts and accepting bad managers.
4. Strengthen communication and open the salary system.
Now, some enterprises adopt the secret wage system. The non-disclosure of salary increase or bonus payment makes it difficult for employees to judge whether there is a connection between salary and performance. Also, there is the problem of trust. People can't see other people's remuneration and don't understand their contribution tendency to the company, which will naturally weaken the incentive and satisfaction functions of these systems. This closed system will hurt people's sense of equality. For employees who get paid through hard work, let them believe that the corresponding remuneration will certainly follow. If the organization fails to establish trust and credibility, then employees' trust in the compensation system will be reduced.
Therefore, management and employees can communicate their intentions with each other, and open relevant salary information, such as the range of salary changes, the growth of average performance and the employees who get bonuses, which can make the salary system more effective and the employee incentive effect better.
5. Let employees participate in the design and management of salary system.
The practice results of many companies show that it is very satisfactory and effective to let employees participate in the design and management of salary system for a long time compared with the performance salary system without employees. Employees' more participation in the design and management of salary system will undoubtedly help to form a salary system that is more suitable for employees' needs and more in line with reality. In the process of participating in the system design, communicating the salary policy and purpose and promoting mutual trust between managers and employees can make the defective salary system more effective.
How to keep pace with the times in performance appraisal, Dana? Dana Minbaeva doesn't know what her career evaluation will be like this year. I don't even know if it will be evaluated. Her organization allows team leaders to experiment freely and then decide whether to change their performance evaluation methods.
This is appropriate because Professor Mingbayeva is studying performance evaluation and employee feedback for copenhagen business school.
Her employer is not the only one who has modified the employee rating and evaluation system. In the past three years, many enterprises have announced (or reformed) their performance evaluation systems, including General Electric, Microsoft, Deloitte, Accenture and Cisco systems.
The rating system bears the brunt. Employees have long complained that they have caused? Rating and dismissal? Process? The person with the lowest score on the bell curve will be forced to leave. This will lead to vicious competition between team members and colleagues. An engineer from Microsoft told Vanity Fair on 20 12: The person in charge of this function will openly undermine the efforts of others. ? A year later, Microsoft abandoned the mandatory rating system.
Even without it? Toxicity? Rating systems can also be confusing. The team leader of a British consulting company said that he was asked to rate employees from three aspects. ? Frankly speaking, there are two aspects that I have never understood, no matter how many times I have discussed with the human resources department. .
However, even if this crude rating system is dying out, employers still don't know which system can replace them. What they are worried about is how to collect enough information to decide salary and promotion.
The overall future of performance management is easier to predict, but the annual career evaluation is rapidly disappearing. Even if it survives, it is becoming a continuous feedback process. In many cases, inspiration comes from the bottom up? Agile? Product development, during which the progress of achieving the goal will be evaluated regularly.
Ashley. Goodall first introduced a new system in Deloitte, and later went to Cisco to lead a similar project. He said that the company won't ask you whether it is a five-level rating or a seven-level rating, or an annual assessment? They look at the whole system. ? At one time, Cisco didn't have any traditional processes: you might not do it at all, but the sky didn't fall. ?
One reason for the change is that the efficiency of table filling and bell curve analysis is extremely low. Mike, Chief Talent Officer of Deloitte? Mike Preston said: We spend so much time proposing, debating and communicating a rating that we really have no time to cultivate talents. ?
The CEO of Accenture caused a wave of praise last year, when he said that this consulting company? Will you cancel 90% of the things you did in the past? . Every year, each employee has 2 1 hour, and the company has a total of 8 million hours dedicated to performance management. Among them, 16 hours is only performing the process.
However, enterprises have not tried to recover all the wasted time. They want to reconfigure these times. General Electric (GE) performance management expert Dzhanis? Dzhanis Semper, director of the industrial group, said that managers of industrial groups are spending more time now? Guide and promote decision-making within the organization, which is similar to that of former CEO Jack? Compared with Jack Welch, who urges managers to draw? Vitality curve? And force the worst 10% employees in any team to leave.
Reformers believe that younger employees are more willing to use mobile applications to regularly measure and update their performance and goals, rather than waiting 12 months. Chris, founder of BetterWorks, who sells goal-setting software? Chris duggan argued: Imagine if Fitbit (Wearable Fitness Tracker) only emailed you at the end of the year. ?
Deloitte and Cisco are based on consulting firm Marcus? The method developed by Marcus Buckingham introduces performance appraisal items, and managers adopt a set of combined methods, including routine? Register? , rapid employee engagement survey and quarterly performance? Snapshot? . Ge called regular discussion? Contact? ; What is the name of the informal feedback meeting? Insight? .
Transparency is another common element in the latest evaluation methods. Accenture hopes to completely adjust its 373,000 employees before the middle of this year, requiring all teams to share their advantages, reach an agreement on their work priorities, and make adjustments according to the public's evaluation of the work progress.
The company also tries to delegate the responsibility of feedback and performance evaluation to smaller departments, believing that colleagues are better at finding laggards and responding quickly.
Accenture has launched a pilot project to hand over the decision-making power of salary to various teams, some of which have only 30 people. Erin, chief leader and human resources officer of the group? Ellyn Shook admits: This is where I used to feel a little nervous, because we didn't want the rewards to become irregular. ?
Critics question whether these reforms focus on the right issues, because the fact that humans like feedback and hate ratings is not new. William, an American management expert who promotes the revolutionary change of Japanese manufacturing quality? Edwards? W. Edwards Deming wrote in the 1980s, Rating? Cultivate short-term performance, screw up long-term planning, breed anxiety, undermine teamwork, and encourage confrontation and politics? .
Deming's followers believe that the company should correct the problematic way of working, rather than obsessing about being doomed to have different personal performances. Kelly, consultant and consultant of Deming College? Kelly Allen said that the formal rating system should be abolished. Once you hear that you got three points on a five-point scale, you can't hear anything else. ?
GE is collecting the opinions of 30,000 employees who have recently tried a world without ratings. Semper talks about its new performance? Huge momentum? It is thought that ratings may undermine this process. As a general rule, she thinks that team leaders will have more data needed to reward employees appropriately. The same idea inspired Cisco and Deloitte's projects, which produced scatter charts about team performance instead of individual figures, so that managers could find abnormal value and evaluate individual performance more fairly and accurately.
However, it may be difficult for people to change their old habits. Accenture's feedback shows that team leaders still want a framework to help them distribute their salaries, which Shuke calls? Fence? .
Some team leaders grew up under the old system, and they may resist this change. The human resources director of a large European company said that managers accustomed to the old system only use the new continuous feedback tool to record the traditional annual evaluation. Steve of SAP SuccessFactors provides such a tool. Steve Hunt said that a company had trouble reorganizing its employees after abolishing the rating system. He said:? They finally asked? Can a salary increase be used as a representative? This is crazy. ?
Professor Mingbayeva said that as long as the performance management mechanism conforms to the enterprise strategy, everyone agrees that their specific structure is not important. She pointed out that Danish managers have used MUS? Danish? Staff development seminar? Abbreviation for? This structure. They saw the reform plan of multinational companies, shrugged and said, what's new? . I wouldn't be surprised if they finally decide to adopt a slightly different system for her performance management experiment in business school? .
Seven questions about performance appraisal: If you ask managers at all levels of an enterprise what the management difficulties are, I believe everyone will say that the most difficult thing for an enterprise is how to do a good job in performance appraisal. In fact, now many enterprises, especially some private enterprises, performance appraisal is a mere formality, either a decoration or a chicken rib, and it is difficult to achieve the expected performance appraisal effect. So, what are the problems with performance appraisal? Let me talk about my own experience.
First, confuse performance appraisal with performance management.
Performance appraisal and performance management are completely different concepts. Many enterprises don't know what performance appraisal is and what performance management is, and confuse the two. Performance appraisal is a kind of appraisal method for enterprises, the purpose of which is to evaluate the completion of major economic and technical indicators, and then link them with rewards and punishments. Performance management is the guiding ideology of enterprise production and operation activities, and all management activities must adhere to this principle. The misunderstanding of these two concepts has led to confusion in implementation.
Second, use the assessment results for employee evaluation.
Many enterprises use the results of performance appraisal to evaluate employees, which is the main problem that performance appraisal has reached a dead end. Evaluation of performance, mainly aimed at? Things? Evaluation, right? People? Assessment and evaluation. Many in the enterprise? Things? Some can be measured by financial data, and some cannot be measured by financial data. For example, newly expanded business areas, such as promoting the standardization of management, cannot be evaluated solely by performance, let alone by individuals. If individuals are evaluated by performance, performance indicators are only one aspect of employee evaluation. Performance appraisal, right? Organization? Behavior evaluation, right? Employees? Behavior evaluation.
Third, push the responsibility to the human resources department.
The performance appraisal of an enterprise is not a matter of any department, but the work of the relevant departments of the enterprise. Generally, an enterprise performance appraisal committee or performance appraisal leading group shall be established, composed of personnel from relevant departments. If the performance appraisal is only pushed to the human resources department, the work will definitely not be done well. The content of performance appraisal should be put forward by relevant professional departments according to the division of professional management.
Fourth, excessively expand the role of performance appraisal.
What is the main purpose of performance appraisal? There are two points: one is to arouse everyone's enthusiasm, and the other is to distribute salary reasonably. Many enterprises infinitely enlarge the role of performance appraisal, raise performance appraisal to the strategic level of enterprises, regard performance appraisal as a key factor to improve enterprise performance, and regard this performance as not only personal performance, but also departmental performance and enterprise performance. In fact, if the performance of an enterprise can be achieved through assessment, it is too simple to be an enterprise.
Fifth, set too high performance appraisal indicators.
You can't slap your head when setting assessment indicators. Too low an indicator is not appropriate, and too high an indicator is not appropriate. The setting of indicators must follow certain principles. Under normal circumstances, enterprises can make systematic consideration and scientific setting with reference to the best level of enterprise history, the average level of the same industry and other factors inside and outside the enterprise. Setting an indicator too high will not only fail to inspire, but also dampen everyone's enthusiasm, because an unattainable indicator is like a moon in the water and a flower in the mirror.
Sixth, the set performance appraisal cycle is too long.
Some enterprises determine the period of performance appraisal as a quarter, some as half a year, and some even as a year. If so, such a performance appraisal will certainly not be in place. If the assessment period is too long, it will not be linked to the monthly salary and bonus, and it will not play the role of timely incentive and restraint. The overall performance of a year is based on the performance of each month. If you can't pay attention to the performance of each month, what is the significance of the annual performance appraisal? It is best to conduct monthly performance appraisal, so that problems in production and operation can be found in time and corrected in time according to the assessment results.
Seventh, there are too many established performance appraisal indicators.