5 ms·
I see a lot of comments bemoaning performance-based bonuses, but consider the following: > I remember being in shouting matches with our signal integrity team
by whack 6y ago
I see a lot of comments bemoaning performance-based bonuses, but consider the following:
> I remember being in shouting matches with our signal integrity team about among other things, how many capacitors we needed. These tiny devices evened out the power of the system, but they wanted far too many to be added to allow the design cheap and easy to build
> Meanwhile I was waking up at 4AM on most days, in full-stress-insomnia. Sometimes I would just give up on sleep and go into work at that early hour, and while there, sometimes run into other stressed-out engineers who also could not sleep. I had shaved as much time as I could possibly get off the schedule, and a little cost. A $25K bonus was out of the question at this point, but $10K or more, still in the running.
> Because manufacturing, as discussed, was not on the secret bonus program, did not even know it existed, and had very little incentive to speed up the rework. As far as they were concerned the project was slightly ahead of schedule, so why rush the job and make another mistake? More time ticked by. They actually did make another mistake anyway, and mounted incorrect rams a second time, which I remember being really mad about.
> Meanwhile, our sister project had managed to minimize their cost target and beat the target schedule of their project, such that each member of that team received the full $25,000.
Sounds to me like the bonus program was working exactly as intended. OP got into shouting matches with other stakeholders to trim overly cautious expenses. He and his teammates voluntarily worked far outside regular working hours. Both him and his sister team succeeded in delivering a successful project ahead of time, with lower costs, and were ultimately tripped up only by the incompetence of other teams that had minimal bonus incentives.
I've noticed a huge difference between orgs where people have skin in the game, and orgs where people don't. People with skin in the game, have a real fire under their ass. It's inspiring to see how much they are able to get done, and how quickly. At orgs where people don't have skin in the game, I spend half my time sitting in meetings, discussing what doc we should write next, what format we should use for the doc, and when to schedule the next meeting to review that doc. It's as though people are more interesting in impressing one another and putting in facetime, rather than actually getting stuff done. In fact, I've noticed that people often add a net-negative value to many projects - their urge to add their 2 cents and make their impact felt, results in goalposts getting constantly shifted and launches getting continually delayed.
Is it possible for a badly designed bonus program to produce disastrously bad results? Definitely. But there has to be a better way to give people more skin in the game, when it comes to doing their job as effectively as possible.
- lazyasciiart 6y agoYour "skin in the game" should not be arbitrarily tied to a metric/achievement that is not under your control or else working to the same objectives. If manufacturing have no motivation to go faster, I have no control over their speed, and I know they'll just take as long as the schedule allows? then screw it, getting it to them early won't help me get my bonus. Now, if manufacturing was also getting a bonus dependent on an early shop date, you're in it together. Or if manufacturing reports to me, I can tell them what to prioritize.
- heyoni 6y agoIt sucks but you can't just get bonuses for trying hard, especially when your company is on the verge of collapse or getting bought up for scraps. It's not always fair but in this case, the OP was still getting a good salary. They decided to take a risk together with their employer and it didn't pan out as well as they'd have liked. Happens all the time.
- WillDaSilva 6y agoIf the goal is to increase the productivity of the employees, then what you want is for the employees to be trying harder. To do that you'll want to incentive trying hard, e.g. through bonuses. The main reason bonuses are awarded for achieving good outcomes instead of for trying hard is because the former is easier to measure. Intentionally rewarding the achievement of good outcomes (which is a matter of chance) instead of good efforts will lead to strife, as those who put in just as much work but weren't as lucky will feel cheated.
- habitue 6y agoThis is just highly dependent on the structure of the company and the ability to objectively determine an individual's input into the final profit of the company. Small companies, sales orgs, hedge funds have an advantage here. If you're not so lucky, your industry / company size may result in bonuses getting handed out completely based on who your boss likes, and no one can argue because it's subjective. Spend months sorting out a rat's nest of code that your predecessors created? Over the long term, this is value creating behavior for the company. Is a portion of the bottom line measurably attributable to it in a particular year? Maybe, maybe not.