A pay for performance culture is one where people receive monetary rewards based on the value they provide to the company.  The more value you provide, the more you are paid.   The assumption is people will provide more value if they are financially incented based on their contributions.   Another assumption is the company can accurately measure people’s performance contributions.

Adopting a pay for performance mindset, while generally a good idea, can over-simplify what business leaders truly want and what actually motivates employees.  To illustrate this, consider the following 4 pay for performance cultures in order of best to worst to somewhere in-between.

The best scenario:  performance without pay. Businesses don’t actually want to pay for performance.  What they ideally want is performance without having to pay.   But most employees are not willing to accept this proposition.  We rightfully expect to be paid for what we contribute.  Nevertheless, it is possible to inspire people to achieve high levels of performance without focusing on pay.  Volunteer organizations do this all the time.  There are a lot of things that motivate people.  The motivational value of pay varies depending on the type of job and employee, and business leaders who use pay as the sole tool for motivating employees risk adopting a very expensive and marginally effective leadership approach.

The worst scenario:   pay for poor performance. The worst case scenario for a business occurs when employees are rewarded for doing things that undermine company performance.  This occurs more often than companies would like to admit, particularly in companies whose managers have to comply with restrictive personnel policies, rules, and regulations.    Rewarding poor performance encourages counterproductive behavior and destroys the motivation of high performers.  High performers dislike it when they do not receive any sense of recognition or rewards for their contributions.  But they hate it when they see rewards going to poorer performing colleagues.

A lousy scenario:  performance only for pay. One of the problems with creating a direct link between pay and performance is some people will never feel they are getting paid enough.   No matter how much pay these people receive for doing something, over time they always seem to want more.  Payouts can quickly switch from being a reward to being an expectation.  Today’s financial bonus is tomorrow’s entitlement.  Once this happens, pay ceases to be a motivator and becomes a source of dissatisfaction.

The pragmatic scenario:  performance influences but does not completely determine pay. Research on productivity, fairness, and motivation indicates that there should be a positive relationship between how much people are paid and how much they contribute to the company.  But the relationship between pay and performance does not need to be perfect to be effective.  Many things influence pay levels beyond individual performance (e.g., overall company financials).   Conversely, pay is only one of many things that influence performance.  Companies should create a link between performance and pay, but should not overemphasize pay as the only reason why employees should seek to perform at higher levels.

Establishing links between pay and performance does tend to increase productivity.    But it is not just the promise of pay that drives the productivity.  When you link pay to performance, employees and managers get much more serious around defining what they mean by “performance”.   And clearly defining performance expectations drives all kinds of benefits for increasing workforce productivity, regardless of pay levels.

When done well, performance management creates a shared sense of performance expectations across a company, gives employees meaningful feedback that helps them improve their effectiveness, and provides the organization with insight into the quality and capabilities of the workforce.   When done poorly, performance management has about the same level of strategic value as the process for completing expense reports.  It simply documents what people did in the past (and often does this very poorly), and has very little emphasis on improving what they might do in the future.

Using performance management to drive business execution is largely a matter of focusing on four things:

Accuracy: have you clearly defined the goals and competencies that people are being evaluated against?  Effective performance management starts with accurately defining what you mean by performance.

Relevance: Is performance management data used for anything that is important to the managers who are completing the reviews?  If managers know their performance ratings are going to be examined by senior leaders in the company and used to inform important workforce decisions then they will take them more seriously.  For example, are performance management ratings used to influence succession and promotion decisions?  Are managers expected to discuss their ratings with their peers, or do performance ratings just go into a file cabinet never to be seen again unless they lawyers show up?  Note, pay is probably the most common outcome linked to performance reviews.  While pay decisions are certainly relevant to managers, in terms of impacting the value managers get from performance data, tying performance to the pay of their direct reports is probably relatively low on the list.

Accessibility: Is it easy for managers to provide and use ratings?  Do they have access to the tools, skills and knowledge needed to make accurate ratings and hold productive employee feedback discussions?

Accountability: Do leaders in the company hold managers accountable for making accurate performance ratings?  What happens to a manager if they refuse to complete their performance reviews or provide poor quality data?

Focusing on these four areas will go a long way toward increasing the impact of performance management on business execution.   Conversely, a failure to think through issues of accuracy, relevance, accessibility and accountability is almost certain to lead to a performance management process that solely focuses on tracking the past as opposed to influencing the future.

SuccessConnect 2010 kicked off today in the beautiful city of Frankfurt, our final SuccessConnect destination for 2010.

The event started with a bang with the ever energetic, Lars Dalgaard taking the stage.  Announcing the acquisition of YouCalc, a Danish company, to a jam packed house, Lars explained how SuccessFactors latest purchase will let business create and share custom reports and analytics from the cloud.

Jay Larson, SuccessFactors Head of Sales, was next up to the podium. Jay discussed HR’s new economic reality – do more with less: more ROI; greater business impact; connect HR with the business; and close the gap between strategy and execution.  He then went on to share success stories from those who have implemented more for less and have “BizX’ed” their organizations.  

Dmitri Krakovsky drilled further into SuccessFactors recent YouCalc acquisition explaining the new Calculator in the Cloud feature that will allow users to perform analytic mash-ups and what-if scenarios from any cloud based application. Dmitri also expressed his excitement over SuccessFactors new partnership with Jobvite, pointing out that the time to hire is not as important as hiring the best.

The final SuccessConnect of the year showcased the best of the best with Norbert Kleinjohann, CIO Siemens AG and Marion Horstmann, Corporate Vice President of HR, Siemens AG sharing their secrets for success.  

Marion Horstmann shared Siemens transformation of the HR function using a global people strategy of which transparency was a key element. Marion expressed her delight that her three requirements for a strong HR strategy were inherently delivered via SuccessFactors solutions: integrated applications for all people processes; a uniform product completely that speaks in a single global language; and recurring efficiency and higher quality.

Norbert Kleinjohann then went on to discuss how Siemens positioned their standard HR system, labeled 4Success, for success. “During the evaluation process, Siemens IT team worked with their HR colleagues to assess 50 possible suppliers, both on premise and in the Cloud. We awarded the contract to SuccessFactors in March 2009, based on functionality and usability and the provisioning of an integrated solution with consistent data models,” says Kleinjohann.  (See article SuccessConnect: The Biggest Cloud in the World) Kleinjohann cites: “We have seven modules in place – target setting, performance management, compensation management, roundtables, career development planning, recruitment management, and employee profiles. We went live within 6 months with the target setting module which we rolled out to 170,000 employees. We now have 400,000 employees information loaded into 4Success and have 40,000 log ins per day.” SuccessFactors had the fastest implementation, best functionality, usability, and integrated capabilities.  Kleinjohann says: “I believe that Cloud Computing will be adopted by IT sooner than we expect.”

The audience enthused over the Siemens presentation stating that it was a pretty impressive story for an impressive first day in Frankfurt!

1. Simplicity
   This is a core value of the company, to make it as easy as possible for our users to do their jobs – reduce clutter and complexity wherever possible.
2. Efficiency
   Provide users with the most efficient means possible for them to accomplish their goals – in general, the fewer delays, page views, and mouse-clicks, the better.
3. Quality and robustness
   Because of the importance and sensitivity of our customer’s data, as well as the uptime (availability) of our product, our product must be precise, solid, well functioning, secure, and unbreakable.
4. Clear, direct, and honest communication
   We follow guidelines for communications that also happen to be good for user interfaces! Instructions and messages should never confuse the user.
5. Add value at every step
   We demand of ourselves to add “value” at every step. Every feature of our product should have some strategic reasoning behind it. If it doesn’t add value for our users, we must question why it’s there. To add strategic value, we strive for:      
   1. Relevance
      Our design must be appropriate and usable by the intended audience, and reflect the user’s world. We should avoid jargon and metaphors that don’t fit how users think of our product.
   2. Visibility
      We believe organizations work best when there is direct line of sight – people can see what they should be doing. The same holds true for user experience. If users can see and understand the capabilities of the system, they will be more successful in accomplishing their tasks.
   3. Accountability and results
      At the end of the day, our customers must justify the cost of using our product, and we have to be able to provide measurable results that show our product being beneficial, if not invaluable – everything we do should be mapped to a promise to make our customers’ companies better.
6. Improve cross-module integration
   One of the core benefits of the SuccessFactors platform is the ability for different modules to work together to deliver more value to the user. This is an inherent advantage that SuccessFactors has over products in silos or standalone products that may have been sewn together as a result of an acquisition.
7. Showcase user-centric innovations
   Ideas, needs, and solutions from user research are brought to the forefront in the SuccessFactors UI, while applying our deep design experience and knowledge of usability principles.
8. Kaizen!
   To keep delivering value to our customers, stay ahead of their needs, and maintain our edge on our competitors, we must constantly improve our product. We must evaluate it from every angle, identify and address its weaknesses, and constantly work to improve the product by working towards these design goals.

From the three pillars to these eight design guidelines, our GUI has one purpose – to unlock the potential gold mine of actionable, people-related data that resides within our fully integrated talent and performance management suite. As we have stated, the more people use our software, the more value is added to the transaction system, but there is another layer of value to be extracted from the richness of the data, not just the quantity. When businesses invest in multiple modules, Goal Management, Career Planning, Recruiting, Compensation, Performance Management, incredibly rich data is gathered that can help businesses make very strategic people decisions quickly and objectively. Our GUI is designed to help our users easily tap into that rich data to help them make the right decisions to drive people performance.

One question we often get is exactly how much improvement can I expect from talent and performance management systems. SuccessFactors Research engaged with Gen-Probe over a year ago to develop a case to show them how they could drive improvement in their organization through people. After successfully implementing SuccessFactors, the results have been very impressive.

• 10% Increase in the retention of high performers
• 37% Decrease in the retention of low performers
• 20% Increase in the employees who felt they had a good understanding of how their pay is determined
• 19% Increase in employees who understand the measure used to evaluate performance

Furthermore, Gen-Probe was able to reform their compensation process. High performers could now earn 150% of their bonus awards, while low performers were limited to less than 100%. In fact the visibility and transparency built into the system allowed Gen-Probe to look at the total distribution of merit and bonus pay, as well provide immediate insight into performance appraisals.

How did Gen-Probe drive change in their organization? Then recently answered this question in an article about the success of their performance management system:

“The new performance management system focused on four critical elements. The first was to provide support for defining and aligning individual goals with Gen-Probe corporate goals. The second was to provide frequent opportunities for feedback to maintain focus on achieving the already-established goals. The action plan also focused on a rewards system that tied achievement of individual and corporate goals to the allocation of merit and bonus awards. Lastly, the plan focused on strengthening the foundational skills for all employees and managers to effectively communicate goals, performance expectations and address issues before they become hurdles to achieving results.”

Can you afford to let your competitors gain that kind of advantage? Particularly now, with the economy slowing and companies renewing a focus on cost and performance, talent and performance management is critical to driving success. Companies who cede this advantage will emerge from the slow economy weaker and less competitive. Gen-Probe has proved that when companies take human capital management seriously, they win.

Professor of management at Drake University in Iowa, Steve Scullen, found that forced ranking, including the firing of the bottom 5% or 10%, results in an impressive 16% productivity improvement.

Companies that are able to quickly compare the performance of their people to find high and low performers have an advantage over those who cannot. Low performers actually cost the company money, so when a business manages them out, they see an immediate benefit. The opportunity cost is even higher. If high performers contribute about 5 times as much as low performers, as our friend and thought leader Dr. Peter Cappelli has found in his research, the opportunity costs is huge. Imagine how much more value the company could generate if they could replace low performers with high performers.

These kinds of optimizations are on everyone’s mind in todays slowing economic environment. SuccessFactors decided to tailor a solution for optimizing the workforce by building a tool that allows managers to stack rank their employees.

Of course stack ranking isn’t just about managing out low performers, but it is also about ensuring that you are able to find and cultivate your best talent. Those top performers who contribute 5 times as much as the low performers should be rewarded, leaders should be identified and trained. Competencies should be compared and managed across teams to ensure that the right capabilities are in place. Stack ranking is a great tool not only for optimizing your workforce, but also for building it. 

Already rich with performance management data, the SuccessFactors Stank Ranker helps managers to:

• Visually Rank Talent – Instantly identify your top-ranked players so that you can optimize your team by motivating and cultivating your best people. Give limited rewards to top employees that deserve extra recognition, or quickly identify low performers to let go when faced with tough layoff decisions.
• Go Beyond Performance Reviews –Stack Ranker expands the formal review process by letting you capture new characteristics for a more holistic assessment. For example, you can incorporate factors like criticality of the role into ranking or other criteria to serve as tie breakers.
• Assess Everyone at Once – Quickly assess your entire team across critical competencies and criteria in real time — all in one place. Side-by-side rating promotes more accurate relative assessments.

Stack Ranker was designed to help companies act now. Organizations simply cannot afford to carry the dead weight of low performers in these uncertain times. Furthermore, they need to move quickly or they will be outflanked by their competitors. Tools like Stack Ranker are critical to succeeding in today’s environment.

Everyone puts on a little weight during good times – vacations and holidays are notorious times for over eating, relaxed behavior and good feelings. Well for businesses, the vacation has come to an abrupt end. After years of easy credit and a booming housing market, the bottom has fallen out from under companies more quickly than anyone had expected, and the economic uncertainty looks as if it will continue for some time.

What will businesses do with all of the excess weight they put on during the good times, when they were content and growing with the rest of the economy? Well for those of us who have had to lose holiday pounds before, we know there are a lot of ways to get back in shape. The obvious solution is calorie restriction, cutting back on the excess – but this technique alone will leave you weaker than before you put on the weight. When the economy recovers, companies who depend on cutting calories alone will emerge weak and unable to take full advantage of the changing and improving business environment. Cutting calories alone leads to smaller muscles and a weaker body.

The best approach to losing weight is an approach that optimizes your body. Sure calories will have to be cut, but if you plan and execute carefully, you can ensure that you don’t lose any muscle. You might even emerge leaner and stronger than before. This should be the goal of every company planning layoffs and workforce adjustments for the economic downturn. To optimize the workforce in a downturn you should:

• Lay off people based on data from the performance management system, so your strongest “muscles” aren’t lost
• Find the positions within the company that are critical to your success, and ensure that successors are named for those positions
• Identify the key competencies that drive your success, and ensure that they are cultivated during the downturn, so you can emerge with strength

Companies often focus too much on cutting, or building one part of their organization. Strong arms won’t help you win a footrace. Optimizing the whole body is the best way to lose holiday weight – for companies it is the difference between remaining competitive and falling behind. Use the data in your talent and performance management system to optimize your workforce. Now more than ever companies need to be smart about managing their resources, including their talent.

I mention this because one of the most common mistakes made in Human Capital Management is confusing skills with competencies. Skills can be learned, certificates can be earned, etc. Competencies take much longer to develop. For example, a skill might be profient in C++ (a programming language), but a competency might be high capacity for problem solving. Problem solving is important for programming in any language, and can be applied to many other challenges in the workplace.

SuccessFactors Research conducted a study of competency management of our own customers, and was able to identify what some winners do in various industries. The implication was pretty clear, companies that effectively manage the competencies of their people have greater potential to do better. But competencies aren’t just about overall company performance – they are highly relevant to individuals. If you can figure out which competencies are the most important for a given position, you can better place and develop people to succeed in that position. Competencies aren’t just leading indicators of success for your company, but also for your people.

If there is a need to scale down on the number of employees, real visibility into who is to be let go and who to keep becomes even more important. Failure to deal with this the right way will cause a negative impact on engagement levels and ultimately performance and results. What is the cost of decreased turnover of your low performers? More than you think. Not only are they not working to their full potential, and therefore costing the company money, but they also bring down the morale of high performers. Have you ever worked on a team with free rider? Motivation levels fall quickly for the entire team.

Gen-Probe is an admirable organization and a great example of someone that really deals with retention in a textbook way of focusing on the “right” retention and not just retention in general. They hold HR executives accountable for driving the right behavior in their organization – increasing retention for high performers while addressing issues of low performance through active performance management and increased attrition. They even tie part of their executives’ bonuses to these retention and turnover rates reinforcing the importance of this. As we all know, it is very costly to lose great employees but, also consider how costly it is to keep disengaged, low-performers with direct losses of contribution, and potential toxic effects on colleagues across the organization.

So be cautious in this rocky, economic period. If you see that your voluntary turnover rates go down don’t automatically assume that it means improved engagement – in some cases it could actually mean the opposite…