????美國鋁業公司位于南卡羅來納州古斯灣的一個生產廠。

????經營環保礦場可不容易。因為就算金屬較為接近地表，從地下獲取金屬也會破壞環境，鋁就是如此。

????然而，作為全球最大鋁土礦開采商之一的美國鋁業公司（Alcoa）已經為自己設定了宏偉的環保目標。2010年，這家公司表示會在今后20年里將自己精煉和熔煉業務產生的碳排放在2005年的基礎上減少35%。同樣是在2010年，美國鋁業公司設立了一個新的職位——首席環保官，由凱文?安東擔任，他曾是該公司某業務部門的首席財務官。美國鋁業公司將安東20%的薪酬與他在推動該公司環保目標方面的進展相掛鉤。

????美世咨詢公司（Mercer）的人力資本業務主管詹妮弗?瓦格納說，大多數公司并沒有將員工薪酬與環保目標直接掛鉤，其中包括在企業責任方面處于前沿的公司。

????或許，重拾環保方案并與員工薪酬相結合的部分麻煩在于敲定具體的、可量化的環保目標。“它不同于財務報表，”瓦格納說。涉及到環保，“跟蹤監測的最好方法真的沒有標準可循。”

????除了要制定環保目標之外，企業還必須為有效實施激勵性薪酬制定非常明確的目標。2006年，美國績效制保護委員會（Merit Systems Protection Board）就如何實施激勵性薪酬的問題向國會提交了一份報告，其中寫道：“企業在決定評估什么、提供哪種獎勵時必須非常謹慎，因為他們很可能會得到他們衡量的東西，但這些東西可能是、也可能并不是他們真正想要的。”

????安東堅稱，美國鋁業公司的數據不存在問題。“我們已經建立了成熟的工作程序，擁有龐大的績效歷史數據庫，因此我們可以自信地說，我們非常了解我們自己的評估工作。”美國鋁業公司每年都會根據安東和其他員工是否達成了碳足跡、溫室氣體排放以及該公司為2020年和2030年設定的其他環保目標來對他們進行評估。

????在美國鋁業公司里，不是只有安東和其他高管的薪酬才與環保目標掛鉤。安東說，實際上這種做法在該公司已經根深蒂固。即使是中等部門的負責人，也有部分薪酬與環保目標以及有關工作場所安全性和多樣化的目標相掛鉤。

????該公司的環保目標被融入了這個礦業巨頭的績效工資文化。在安東的記憶中，美國鋁業公司一直都在實行績效工資制度，而且他相信這種制度發揮了作用。“關鍵之處在于，上下一心，設定積極的目標，并確保這些目標與企業發展方向相一致。”

????但問題是，激勵性薪酬對企業來說到底是不是最佳的解決方案？哈佛商學院（Harvard Business School）工商管理教授邁克爾?比爾說，如果薪酬與特定目標結合得過于緊密會迫使員工專注于細節而忽視了全局。

????There's no easy way to run a green mine. Harvesting metal from the ground disrupts the environment, even when that metal is gathered relatively close to the surface, which is the case with aluminum.

????Yet Alcoa (AA), one of the world's biggest miners of aluminum ore bauxite, has set ambitious green goals for itself. In 2010, the company said that it would cut its carbon emissions from its refining and smelting businesses by 35% over the following 20 years, compared to the amount it emitted in 2005. Also in 2010, Alcoa created a new chief sustainability officer position for Kevin Anton, who was formerly CFO of one of the company's business units. Alcoa connects 20% of Anton's pay to his progress in advancing the company's green goals.

????Most companies don't tie employee compensation directly to environmental goals. That's including the firms that tend to be ahead of the curve on corporate responsibility, says Jennifer Wagner, a principal at consulting firm Mercer's Human Capital business.

????Part of the trouble, perhaps, with moving green initiatives off of the backburner and into people's salaries is in nailing down specific, measurable targets for sustainability. "It's not like financial reporting," says Wagner. When it comes to sustainability, "There really aren't standards about the best way to track things."

????Green goals aside, companies must set very specific goals for incentive-based pay to work at all. According to a 2006 U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board report to Congress about how to implement incentive-based pay, "Organizations must be very careful when deciding what to measure and reward, because they are quite likely to get what they measure -- which may or may not be what they really want."

????Alcoa doesn't have a numbers problem, Anton insists. "We've got mature processes and we've got a great historical database of performance, so we have the confidence to know that our metrics work." Every year, Anton and other Alcoa employees are evaluated on their ability to reach their carbon footprint, greenhouse gas emissions, and other environmental goals they have set for 2020 and 2030.

????Anton and other C-Suite members aren't the only Alcoa employees whose salaries are tied to sustainability. In fact, the practice goes fairly deep into the organization, Anton says. Even staffers in charge of medium-sized departments have part of their salaries tied to green goals, as well as goals involving workplace safety and diversity.

????The company's green goals fold into a larger pay-for-performance culture at the mining giant. Alcoa has had an incentive based pay system for as long as Anton remembers, and he believes it's effective. "The key here is you want to get alignment with your employees, you set aggressive targets, and you make sure those targets line up with where you want to take the organization."

????But then there's the question of whether incentive-based pay is ever the best solution for a company. Coupling pay with certain goals too tightly can force employees to focus on specifics in lieu of the larger picture, says Michael Beer, a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School.