3 ms·
I meant to write a lengthy answer here, but this one hits the nail on the head. Companies take the full risk for starting projects and hiring people: especiall
by endymi0n 5y ago
I meant to write a lengthy answer here, but this one hits the nail on the head.
Companies take the full risk for starting projects and hiring people: especially those just very indirectly relevant to the bottom line. For that, they get the full reward of taking this kind of risk. That's the nature of business and entrepreneurship.
Smart employers recognize value created by employees — direct as well as indirect — and give these employees a share of success. Sometimes in salary, sometimes in stock.
And I said smart because in the long run, there's nothing cheaper than keeping insanely productive employees around by issuing some company stock, promoting them and keeping them happy and productive in any other way possible.
Trying to keep tally on a cent-by-cent base doesn't just create a massive bureaucracy (I've seen one full-time person just doing the compensation plans for the sales team), it also opens up a massive field of bickering around details that could have gone into the product.
- EGreg 5y agoIf it makes you feel better, imagine if the worker started their own startup and then approached us with a business proposition. How would we fairly pay that startup, versus exploiting them? “Wrap” the person in a startup since you feel that only companies should be entrepreneurial. I don’t mind. Then let’s look at the QCM again. This is exactly about attracting the most productive people and giving them a share of the company’s revenues. If you want to do it via stock grants - sure, pay the QCM out in that!