Human resource management has always been an important area
at Stylus since it's inception. One challenge was to develop a compensation
system that would be fair, yet at the same time based on results.
In our case (as with many other smaller companies) the operation
teams are also closely involved with client communication, marketing,
and in many cases, even mundane office work such as accounts, buying office
supplies etc- all of which would somehow help save costs and increase
profitability.
The challenge was
to evolve a system of rewards based on performance that encouraged
people to look at long-term results
As a startup with just 3 people (all promoters) it was pretty
easy and intuitive - everybody just did what it took to stay afloat. But
as the organization grew, it added on people who are looking at building
careers and who were more specialized in their chosen areas.
This brought us to some fundamental questions - if a software
developer only developed software, then would we not need specialists
in every area such as accounts, billing and payment collection? And even
in design, there were the architects, the designers, the database programmers,
the ASP/ JSP / Perl / Cold fusion programmers, QC teams etc. In such a
scenario, would not the generalist who does a number of tasks, some of
which are "non-billable", get sidelined? For example, how would
we evaluate the "value" contributed by a person, who spent the
extra time taking designing, developing, and nurturing our own websites?
After all, it may take months to show results, by which time these contributions
would get long forgotten. Another question was the Catch 22 situation
that all small companies face - we can't offer high salaries till we make
more money, and we can't make more money till we attract the best talent
by offering great salaries.
The easy way out was to decide fixed salaries based on the
perceived value that the person brought to the organization, rather than
just the number of hours of client or "billable" work. But this
calls for arbitrary decisions and compromises. The problem with compromises
was that it, at best, left everyone equally unhappy. And besides, any
ad-hoc rewards only encouraged everyone to look at short term, spectacular
solutions. The challenge was to evolve a system of rewards based on performance
that encouraged people to look at long-term results.
This seemed to be the ideal time to introduce Stock Options.
Unfortunately, we were not yet at a phase where we could look at an IPO,
and neither were the promoters too keen on "selling out".
Thanks to the power of the Internet and the Search Engines,
we were quickly able to look at different options available in this area.
Conventional 401K / ESOP/ Stock Option programs were screened out simply
because we were not listed on any Stock Exchange. Finally, after almost
4 weeks of research, we settled on the Stock Appreciation Rights program
(commonly called SAR or Phantom Stock Options) as a probable delivery
vehicle for our reward dreams. Based on this framework, we devised a novel
(at least we think so!) rewards program.
The SAR would be linked directly to the net profit of the
company. At the beginning of the year, we would settle on the percentage
that will be kept aside for distribution. We would also update the entire
organization on the financial status of the organization, as well as the
plans for the coming year. Financial updates would be published on the
Company Portal at regular intervals, so that every employee knows the
current status of the SAR and our progress against the year plans.
Any activity, whether
it increases revenue or reduces cost would be valued, since both help
increase the overall profitability.
Any activity, whether it increases revenue or reduces cost would be valued,
since both help increase the overall profitability. Even adding new resources
would be done carefully, since more people would mean less for each person,
unless there was more than proportional increase in profits. Thus there
was an inbuilt incentive to build efficiencies and this ensured that the
organization remained competitive at all times.
In order to keep the systems of rewards objective and integrated with
the various performance measurement criteria, the development team set
about defining an objective "grid" which took into account the
individual's score on factors such as the Competency Improvement Plan
(similar to a Performance Appraisal, but focusing on building the individual's
and organization's competency) experience, market value, and alignment
to Core Values.
Of course, in tune with our philosophy that all employees add value,
even employees that were in staff functions such as Human Resources, Finance,
accounts and system administration were included in the program. This
helped bring the team together, ensuring that every employee was aware
(or made aware by his colleagues) of the value that they brought to the
organization.
The team also studied other organizations where the SAR program had failed,
and identified that one major reason for the failure was the complexity
of the entire program. Unlike a conventional Stock Options program, where
the daily Stock Exchange quotes told the employee how much his stock was
worth, the SAR demanded that he/she do the complicated calculations himself
/ herself. In order to simplify this process we developed a "calculator"
where all that the employee had to do was to type in the number of shares,
and the projected income for the period and they would instantly know
how much they would make. The calculator also allowed the employee to
view the share value under different scenarios, such as higher productivity
or changing workforce.
Overall, it helped to boost the feeling of value and ownership in the
minds of all the member of Team Stylus, in addition to the fact that it
fostered longer-term thinking and teamwork, since success benefited everyone.
Above all, it created an environment of fair play, where every employee
knew what was up for grabs. Moreover, since the monthly financial summary
was presented monthly to the entire organization, everyone felt the need
to involve in ensuring the organization moved ahead, month after month.
Will it succeed? We figure that only time will tell. But in one area
at least it's already proved it's worth - in terms of the time that top
management now needs to spend to decide on ad hoc rewards. This time saved
could be put to better use in planning and ensuring that the company made
money - for everyone.