创业公司奖金猛于毒
|
大多数公司的选择会是，无论如何先发放奖金。而这就能让员工们高兴吗？不见得。因为这是他们预料之内的事。那么，奖金能帮助确定明年的宏伟目标吗？也不尽然。在没有达到既定目标的情况下发放奖金等于是在向人们暗示，公司的目标实际上无关紧要，进而也就否定了靠奖金激励留住员工这种说法。 更糟糕的是，奖金对于招聘也没有太大作用。我认识的大多数人在加入一家公司之前，对奖金都有所怀疑。他们不知道公司的目标有多么宏伟，或者他们实现目标奖金的可能性有多大。此外，在工资里还包含一种自我意识的要素，而这种要素在奖金中却并不存在。在其他待遇平等的情况下，多数人宁愿加入一家提供10万美元年薪的公司，也不愿意接受年薪9万美元加2万美元绩效奖金的待遇。这种选择与规避风险无关，更多的是一种自我肯定，确信自己价值10万美元的工资。再说，他们完全不清楚能获得奖金的可能性到底有多大。 而且，奖金还会造成一种“堆沙袋”的公司文化，因此也是一种糟糕的激励工具。员工不是想着实现令人不可思议的宏伟目标，而是开始考虑这个目标是否可能实现。如果他们接受一个野心勃勃的目标，他们能否领到奖金。然后，他们就会要求降低目标，选择最有可能获得奖金的目标，而这实际上与公司利益背道而驰。 那么，大公司又有什么不同呢？大公司并不会确立雄心勃勃的目标（增长10%与增长200%的区别），而且员工通常不会像在初创公司一样，可能获得公司股权。最重要的是，财务目标能够得到更好的理解，而且通常都能够实现。初创公司基于可能的事情进行预测，而大公司则基于可行的事情进行预测。因此，大公司向员工发放奖金更容易操作。 总之，奖金不是好的招聘工具，也不是留住员工的好工具，更不是好的激励工具。综上所述，奖金会损害公司文化，使团队关注错误的目标。 既然如此，一家初创公司要想招聘员工、留住人才和激励员工，什么才是有效的薪酬工具呢？答案是股权。给员工支付与公司当前经营状况相符的公平工资，使所有人都能享受到具有巨大升值空间的股票潜力。如果公司实现了翻四番的目标，公司股权的增值幅度肯定要超过业务增加三倍时的幅度。如果员工未能完成计划，他们也会明白，虽然股权并未出现大幅增值，但随着公司不断发展，他们还是会从未来的股票升值中受益的。没有了财务奖励，员工也就不会在工作上玩“空手道”。因为他们知道，只有实现公司的宏伟目标，才能让手中持有的股票回报实现最大化。 最好的一点是，股票所带来的回报量级远远高于有可能兑现的奖金。（财富中文网） 本文作者埃瑞克•帕雷为风险投资基金Founder Collective的主理合伙人。本文原载于其个人博客。 译者：刘进龙/汪皓 |
Most companies just pay out the bonus anyway. Did that make the employees happy? Not really. They expected it. Did the bonus help set the ambitious goals for the next year? Not really. Paying the bonus below the goal suggested that the goals don't really matter, which undermines the idea that the bonus is a form of motivation that leads to retention. Worse yet, bonuses are not effective at recruiting employees. Most people that I know are a bit skeptical of bonuses before they join a company. They have no idea how ambitious the goals are or how likely they are to achieve the target bonus. On top of that, there is an ego element tied to salary that is absent in bonuses. All other things being equal, most people would rather join a company offering $100,000 a year in salary than make $90,000 a year with a potential target bonus of $20,000. That isn't so much an issue of risk aversion, but more of self assurance that they are worth $100,000 salary combined with the unknown of how likely they are to get any bonus at all. Bonuses also create a culture of sandbagging and therefore are a bad motivation tool. Instead of wanting to achieve incredibly ambitious goals, employees start to consider whether the goal is likely and whether they will achieve their bonuses if they accept an ambitious goal. By arguing for lower goals, employees are optimizing for getting a bonus while actually working counter to the interests of the company. Why are large companies different? At large companies goals are not as ambitious (10% growth vs. 200% growth) and employees typically don't have the equity potential that they have at startups. Most importantly, financial goals are much better understood and typically achievable. Startups forecast based on what's possible. Large companies forecast based on what's probable. It's easier to bonus employees on the latter than the former. So bonuses aren't a good recruiting tool. Or a good retention tool. Or a good motivation tool. For these reasons, bonuses damage culture and focus the team on the wrong objectives. What compensation tool is effective for recruiting, retaining, and motivating employees at a startup? Equity. Pay employees a fair salary for the stage of the company and keep everyone aligned to the extraordinary equity potential of huge growth. If the company achieves a 4X plan, the company's equity has appreciated more than if it achieves a 3X plan. When employees don't quite achieve plan, they understand that the equity hasn't appreciated as much, but they are still rewarded for the forward progress with assumed appreciation of their stock. Employees have no financial incentive to sandbag because trying to achieve ambitious goals is how they maximize the equity reward. Best of all, equity has the potential of paying out orders of magnitude higher than any potential bonus. Eric Paley ( @epaley) is managing partner at Founder Collective. This post originally appeared on his blog. |
