精品国产_亚洲人成在线高清,国产精品成人久久久久,国语自产偷拍精品视频偷拍

從理論上講，企業可以建立一個薪酬體系來管理員工績效。其中，可以用獎金和其他短期激勵措施來獎勵和鼓勵拔尖的員工，也可以給表現平庸（或者更差的）員工少漲薪，甚至不漲薪，把這部分錢留給頂尖員工，這樣就不必增加總體的工資預算。這聽起來很容易做到。

然而，在實際操作中，情況完全不同。

150家大中型公司的高級經理反映，其薪酬激勵計劃根本沒有起到作用。只有不到三分之一（32%）的受訪高管認為他們的計劃“能夠有效地根據個人的不同表現給予不同的薪酬?！盬illis Towers Watson公司最新公開了這一研究。

該研究顯示，只有一半人表示年度獎勵，比如給優秀員工發放的獎金，會根據員工的工作表現加以區分。最沒有效果的是績效加薪，評判標準在于員工的績效表現是否優異。只有五分之一（20%）的受訪高管認為，在他們的公司，績效加薪“有助于提升個人表現”。

如果績效薪酬的方案沒有這么流行，這也不會是個大問題。在2014年創造歷史最高紀錄之后，依靠激勵性工資來獲得出色業績的公司還在越來越多。Willis Towers Watson 公司全球薪酬主管勞拉?賽伊恩發現：“公司每年要花費幾億美元來實施這些令人失望的計劃。如果這是任何其他業務流程，我們現在早就去著手改善投資回報率了。”

問題出在哪里？激勵薪酬往往不能產生效果的最大原因似乎是，管理者并不會堅持這個計劃。

在績效加薪上尤其如此。賽伊恩表示：“美國公司每年加薪的傳統已經根深蒂固。30歲以上的員工就是在這種耳濡目染下成長起來的，他們期待著漲薪?，F在公司說：‘好，從現在開始，不是所有人都能每年加薪了?！麄兿嘈殴芾碚邥岩徊糠中剿ǖ帽容^低，從而在關鍵的目標領域提供更大幅度的漲薪和更多獎金?！?/p>

然而，這些管理者難以同那些沒有獲得加薪的下屬展開對話。所以，更通常的情況是，老板仍然會增加每年的“績效獎金”，而不考慮這個員工的表現如何。不僅如此，還有26%的受訪公司甚至會給“未能達到目標的員工”發放獎金。

如果有更多流動的資金，也就是說，如果公司在他們規劃的獎金池中投入了足夠的資金，這可能會有用。但研究指出，自2005年以來，這種情況只出現了兩次，并補充道：“2015年的獎金池只有計劃值的87%?！?/p>

研究表示，考慮到獎金的不足，經理不愿意與表現普通或糟糕的團隊成員發生沖突，就意味著“即便是表現最優秀的員工，獲得的獎金也比計劃中應得的要少。”在目前的人才市場，一份微薄的獎金遠遠不如競爭對手的簽約獎金那么有吸引力。（財富中文網）

譯者：嚴匡正

審校：任文科

In theory, it sounds like a no-brainer: Come up with a compensation system that rewards and encourages topnotch employees with bonuses and other short-term incentives. Fund it, without blowing up the overall pay budget, by giving mediocre (or worse) performers tiny raises, or none at all.

In practice, though, it’s a different story.

Senior managers at 150 large and midsized companies in a new Willis Towers Watson studyadmit their incentive pay plans don’t actually work. Barely one-third (32%) of the executives polled think their programs are “effective at differentiating pay based on individual performance.”

Only half say annual incentives, like bonuses for top employees, make any difference in how well people do their jobs. Least effective of all: Merit raises, which managers are supposed to give (or not) to employees based on, well, merit. Just one in five (20%) of the executives surveyed thinks merit pay “drives higher levels of individual performance” in their companies.

This wouldn’t matter quite so much if pay for performance plans weren’t so popular. But, since reaching a record high in 2014, the number of companies counting on incentive pay to produce stellar results has kept on rising. “Companies are spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on these disappointing programs,” observes Laura Sejen, global chief of rewards at Willis Towers Watson. “If this were any other business process, certainly we’d all have moved to improve the ROI by now.”

So what’s the hold-up here? The biggest reason incentive pay so often doesn’t deliver results, it seems, is that individual managers don’t stick with the program.

That’s especially true when it comes to merit raises. “The traditional annual raise has become so ingrained in U.S. companies that every employee over age 30 has ‘grown up’ with it and expects it,” observes Sejen. “Now companies are saying, ‘OK, from now on, not everyone gets a raise every year.’ They’re relying on managers to keep some salaries flat so they can pay larger salary raises and bonuses in critical, targeted areas.”

Those managers, however, are the ones who face difficult conversations with unhappy subordinates who don’t get pay hikes. So most often, bosses are still handing out annual “merit” increases, regardless of how individual employees perform. Not only that, but 26% of companies in the study have paid bonuses even to “employees who fail to meet expectations.”

It would probably help if there were more cash to go around—that is, if companies fully funded their projected bonus pools. The study notes that has happened only twice since 2005, adding that “average projected bonus pool funding levels for 2015 were only 87% of target.”

When combined with that shortfall, managers’ tendency to chicken out on conflict with mediocre or underperforming team members means that “even top performers receive a lower bonus than called for in the plan design,” says the study. In the current market for talent, a skimpy payout may look pretty unappealing next to the signing bonus a competitor is offering.