5 ms·

Managing high performers? Step one: pay them what they're worth. With the reliable incompetence of the average job, we shouldn't ever expect this kind of ratio

• atoav 2y ago
  That article advocates for paying them what they are worth, even if it exceeds the salary of higher-ups.
  • Viliam1234 2y ago
    Found the person who actually read the article before commenting.
    • makerdiety 2y ago
      If you have failed to infer a discovery of the global trend of complete withdrawal from traditional economic institutions, employment, and sources of income due to the stubborn impracticality of jobs rationally compensating very skilled men for their natural potential, then it is certain that you have scientific ability that hovers around a basic level. You would then steadily indicate that you are heavily prone to the fallacy fallacy, such as caring about irrelevant and distracting memes like the No True Scotsman fallacy, for example.
• wslh 2y ago
  > Managing high performers? Step one: pay them what they're worth. Don't forget that no all companies can pay what they're worth... most companies don't.
• swatcoder 2y ago
  Many high performing people receive great compensation, at least in financially flush fields like technology, and maximizing compensation isn't everyone's game. In fact, I'd say that high performers are often less distracted by that than most. What keeps a sufficiently paid high performer around, usually, is a personally rewarding and comfortable work environment. What that means can vary quite a lot though, making it hard to summarize in blogspam and short comments.
  • cvadict 2y ago
    Agree 1000%. I'd take less pay to not have to deal with some middle-management dimwit who read this article trying to actively "coach" me.
    • phil21 2y ago
      Yeah, I don't understand these sort of hot takes in the articles like it. As said middle-management dimwit, isn't sort of the definition of a high performer is that they perform without much coaching? That doesn't mean lack of management as the article implies - it means setting them up for success. Set them on a task, give them a few constraints as needed, and act as a bulldozer to remove blockers as they come to you with them. That's roughly the management a high performer needs in my book. Make sure you listen to them when they complain about something, and fix it within reason. Or explain why you cannot. Don't let penny wise pound foolish stuff fester. Advocate for merit based raises and bonuses - they are making you look good so they should be your first priority when expending political capital. Make sure higher ups and the rest of the org knows about their accomplishments. Simple stuff!
  • packetlost 2y ago
    I'll second this. Most of the top performers I know, at any given time, could probably double their salary if they really wanted to. I know I could almost certainly by moving from a nimble smaller company that treats me with respect and responsibility (and a lot of fun problems) to one of the big tech companies.
• tsunamifury 2y ago
  They will never do that. Gaslit high performers are the profit delta of any team.
• whaaaaat 2y ago
  I am not aware of any role in tech (or really anywhere in wage labor) where people are being paid what they are worth. Nearly every job that exists gets paid a whole lot less than they make for the company, sometimes millions less per year. So I'd say, pay us all what we are worth, and pay the high performers proportionally more.
  • aorloff 2y ago
    The market disagrees
    • whaaaaat 2y ago
      Indeed. Thankfully, the market is not the only way of organizing people.
      • thrw42A8N 2y ago
        The market is the only way of organizing people, thankfully it doesn't mean much. (Even non-profits etc are part of the market)
        • dasil003 2y ago
          The market is not an organization, the market is a disorganization—except in the case of a monopoly/monopsony, in which case intervention is desirable.
          • thrw42A8N 2y ago
            Nobody said that the market is some organization, it's a way of organizing people, and it happens naturally. It's not something you invent, create and maintain, it's something you discover and observe - and try to control, often in vain or with unintended consequences, like weather. There was a market long before anybody thought of the word - and it was one of the first words. The oldest known written text is not some religious fluff or descriptions of market-less utopia, it's a "warranty claim" about a shipment of copper.