4 ms·
The catch is, transparency forces a certain amount of fairness to come with it. I should probably have mentioned that in the article too. It's difficult to kee
by swombat 13y ago
The catch is, transparency forces a certain amount of fairness to come with it. I should probably have mentioned that in the article too.
It's difficult to keep unfair arrangements when all is transparent. You can't just implement transparent salaries, without also making the salary scale fair. And the benefit there is that once salaries are transparent, everyone knows that they're fair, because they can verify it for themselves.
- KiwiCoder 13y agoTransparency forces fairness assuming you can afford to fix the discrepancies in an acceptable amount of time. If you can't fix discrepancies in an acceptable amount of time then full transparency forces something unpleasant, and in this context it is potentially unhelpful to everyone.
- swombat 13y agoOf course. If you're committed down a path where your company is basically unfair to its employees, then yeah, transparency won't help. A good example of transparency not helping is our sudden transparency about the activities of the NSA. Obviously that's not helping them. Though arguably it is helping us. In a case where a company is intrinsically unfair to its employees and can't correct that, transparency would probably hurt the company but help all the employees - by sending a strong message that it's time to get the hell out of this crappy company.
- KiwiCoder 13y agoIt's the other way round - if a company is committed to a path of fairness but has inherited an unfair legacy of salary disparity (this can happen in many ways and is not always because of overt unfairness) then transparency can make it harder for the company to fix the problem.