Archive for the ‘Incentive Plans’ Category

Can Performance be Measured?

April 17, 2008

John Fletcher posted an interesting article “Why Quantitative Measures Often Make Performance Worse, not Better” on the Slow Leadership Blog about how quantifiable objectives is more about office politics than performance.

The article takes the point of view that performance measurement does not work well because typically what is measured is not what matters the most, and that performance often delines when it is measured because once people reach their target there is no incentive to exceed it.

I previously shared some information on performance measurement as well as some personal stories. I agree with John that sometimes quantifiable objectives can be more about office politics and that they can have undesirable effects and he raises a several good points. However, I will say that performance cannot be evaluated without well defined criteria. The article also seems to say that any quantifiable objectives are not as good as less tangible measures, a statement which I can’t agree with.

The example of setting set targets also shows what to avoid; In the example, the goal is to answer 90% of inquiries – answer less than 90% and the employee does not get a bonus, answer more than 90% and the employee receives a bonus. This strategy could lead to employees doing the bare minimum of work to reach 90%, but not strive to achieve 100%. If the department’s goal was to answer as many queries as possible, a better solution would be to use a quota approach: achieve target and receive a bonus, answer between 90 and 95% of inquiries and receive a bigger bonus, answer between 96 and 99% of inquires and receive an even bigger bonus, and answer 100% of inquiries and get the max bonus. This way, at least in theory, employees will always be motivated to exceed the target.

Choosing “good” performance measures and metrics is one of the most critical aspects of designing an incentive plan, while”bad” measures could result in encouraging undesired behaviors. It is important to know exactly what the desired behaviors and goals are before choosing any measurement. Also, as David Cichelli from The Alexander Group and Liz Cobb from Makana Solutions pointed out earlier, too many measures can ruin a compensation plan by making it overly complex and confusing the payees.

What is Incentive, Compensation and Sales Performance Management

December 21, 2007

The field of incentive, compensation and sales performance management was born from the need of companies to define and implement sales performance plans, specifically commissions and bonuses. Several applications exist to manage, measure, track and reward employees to influence sales force behavior.

The goals of compensation management applications are to:

  • manage centrally pay-for-performance plans
  • align strategy with incentive compensation plans
  • reduce errors and inaccurate payments
  • quickly adapt to evolving business challenges
  • improve decision-making by providing timely information and analytics capabilities
  • increase profitability and efficiency by reducing administrative, software development and maintenance costs

Common Acronyms:
CRM: Customer Relationship Management
ECM: Enterprise Compensation Management
EIM: Enterprise Incentive Management
ERP: Enterprise Resource Planning
ESP: External Service Provider
HCM: Human Capital Management
ICM: Incentive Compensation Management
SaaS: Software as a Service
SFA: Sales Force Automation
SPM: Sales Performance Management

ICM and EIM are often used to discuss similar functions and applications. More recently, several vendors have adopted the term “Sales Performance Management” to encompass ICM, EMC and EIM.

In this blog I will discuss various topics and news related to compensation, incentive and sales performance management. I will focus more particularly on the IT aspects of implementing compensation management systems.