My last post on this subject (see part 1) ended up being a little bit of rant on how companies (big & small) hold on to outdated* methods of people/talent attraction and retention.

*) There was little evolution since the days of Henry Ford.

I'd claim, most firms are overspending and underperforming due to this.

[Inspired by this post, courtesy of Corporate Rebels]

So, here's a stab at a more modern approach fitting today's Zeitgeist (I'm copying with pride from pioneering companies):

1) pay all people in the same function the same salary and make the logic transparent (market rates). Independent of individual performance. That is don't make promises you can't keep, don't waste time haggling, focus on human appreciation, recognition and growth. 

You'll safe everyone lots of distraction and overhead costs, which are not adding value to customers and creates unrest instead. It keeps you from favouring one person over another - sympathies are an all to human trait, you can't avoid. 

If there is a profit at year end, share it with your entire crew. Keep it simple, lean and transparent. 

What if someone consistently doesn't meet expectations over a period of time? (i.e. it's not a temporary drop) Say, as an organisation, you know it is the right person for your "ship" from a cultural perspective (e.g. integrity, values, believes, …):

Compare this to the classic approach, which drags on for months or even years: Keeping the person on board at a lower pay (i.e. boni/commissions/salary increases reduced or not granted). It's the worst for all parties.

2) assign people to responsibilities that match their skills and talents. Nothing brings better results than letting people do what they are good at and enjoy the most. The fear of having some jobs not done is unfounded: it is a minor problem to be addressed in an entrepreneurial way (shuffle in team, hire for it, outsource or leave it be - and see what happens).

3) give people autonomy in their jobs and offer support / coaching where asked for. Define one clear goal for the entire organisation and let the teams work out how they can best get there together. 
This requires/sparks an entrepreneurial mindset, encourages small and fast experiments (agility), and lets people grow in more dimensions (than just vertically in a pyramid).


I believe, all people are smart in their own unique fields of expertise (skills). People like a challenge and build something awesome in their field. 

Thus, an organisation should make sure that individual skills contribute as much as possible to your goal. 

And if they don't match, teams need to reshuffle roles or redefine them. No two persons are the same - so having the exact same role assigned to several people will hardly get you effectiveness.

This approach requires being upfront and transparent with one another. Address matters head on. (Depending on societal norms and culture this is easier set than done in some places.) Self-reflection and self-perception is a big challenge for many adults - it doesn't come with age. So this will not be smooth sailing. But teams need to learn this and grow into addressing issues with one another head on, if they want to perform better.

And some times, the best thing is to ask someone to off-board. Not paying them less.

When you do what you're good at, it results in having more purpose and meaning in your job - because you are fulfilling your "calling" (German: Berufung = Beruf/Job). 

Transparency plays a vital part in this. Lack there of is toxic. 
And this is one way that will get an organisation more loyalty from existing talent and attract new talent.