薪酬管理新概念的理解框架

原文:

外文出處InternationalFoundationNews

外文作者_______________FrankL.Giancola_______________

AFrameworkforUnderstandingNewConceptsinCompensation

management

Overthepast25years,severalmajornewconceptsincompensation

managementhavereflectedoverlyambitiousgoals.Expertshavedisagreedabout

theirbasicpremises,andthebusinessworldhashadtroubleacceptingthem.

Examiningthehistoryofthreesuchconcepts-skill-basedpay,broadbandingandtotal

rewards-isworthwhile,foritrevealsthechallengestheypresentandhelpsdefinea

patternforhowprofessionalsdealwiththeseandothernewideasintheprofession.

Skill-BasedPay

Theskill-basedapproachfordeterminingbasepayisbasedonanemployee's

skills,ratherthanhisorhercurrentjob.Leadingthinkersincompensation

managementhavesupportedthisapproachsincethe1980s.Accordingto

compensationexpertsPatriciaZingheimandJaySchusteritisthe“nextgreatthingin

payandbenefits”.InaninterviewEdwardLawlercalledit“thecompensationsystem

ofthefuture79

Thisapproachshiftsthefocalpointfromthejobtotheperson,withthegoalsof

providingemployeeswithgreaterincentivestoimproveskillsandcompetenciesand

givingmanagementamoreversatileworkforce.Generally,employeesarepaidto

acquirehigherskillsintheirownfieldorlateralonesinrelatedfields.Fromasystems

standpoint,jobdescriptions,jobevaluationplansandjob-basedsalarysurveysare

replacedbyskillprofiles,skillevaluationplansandskill-basedsalarysurveys.

Thedisappearanceofthetraditionaljobprovidestheprimaiyrationaleforthis

change.Today,employeesaresaidtohavevariableandunstableworkassignments,

withrolesthatcannotbeassignedavalidpayrateintraditionaljobevaluationplans.

ContentiousTenets

Themaintenetsofskill-basedpay(SBP)conflictwithmainstreambusiness

thinking.Thefirsttenetisthatpayshouldbebasedonlyonskills,takingthevalueof

anemployee'sworktoanorganizationoutofthepayequation.Ineffect,SBP

advocatesareaskingcompensationprofessionalstosetthesamepayratefbr

employees,basedontheirskills,eventhoughtheymighthavesubstantiallydifferent

dutiesandresponsibilitiesandmakesubstantiallydifferentcontributionstoafirm's

success.Theomissionofsomethingoffundamentalvaluetothefirmmakesthe

conceptahardsellwithmanagersandemployees.Inrecentyears,compensation

expertshaveaffirmedthevalueofworkasanessentialpartofthepayequation.

Thesecondtenetisthenotionthatpayshouldbebasedonhowmanyskills

employeeshaveorhowmanyjobstheypotentiallycando,notonthejobthey

currentlyhold.Hereagain,SBPadvocatesmakewhatmanyfirmsconsideran

unreasonablerequest.Theyintroduceacontroversialpayforpotentialconceptthat

directlycontradictsthepayforperfonnanceconceptcompensationprofessionalshave

diligentlystrivedtoestablish.Inrecentyears,emphasishasbeenonwhatemployees

actuallyaccomplishonthejob,ratherthanonstaticconceptsrelatingtowhotheyare,

suchastheirmanagementpotentialorlengthofservice.Also,byaskingfirmstopay

employeesforajobthattheymightperforminthefuture,SBPisapracticefewfirms

couldafford.Withthesecorebeliefs,SBPhasexperiencedanuphillbattlefor

acceptanceastheprimarymeanstodeterminebasepay.

QuestionableAssumption

TheSBPconceptrestsonaquestionableassumption-thatajobdoesnotreflect

theskillsofthepersonrequiredtodoit.Thatmakesjobevaluationplansan

inappropriatemethodforevaluatingskillsandsettingpayrates.AccordingtoSBP

advocates,skillsmustbevaluedbyusingmarket-basedskillsurveys.Theyoverlook

thefactthatmostpoint-factorjobevaluationplansawardthebulkoftheirpointsfor

thepossessionandapplicationofknowledge,skillsandabilities.Onthispoint,

LawlerhasstatedJinmanycases,this(skill-basedpay)willnotproduce

dramaticallydifferentpayratesthanareproducedbypayingfbrthenatureofthejob.

Afterall,theskillsthatpeoplehaveusuallymatchreasonablywellthejobsthatthey

aredoing.”

Alsooverlookedisthefactthatmanyoccupations(e.g.,accountant,electrician

andactuary)doreflecttheskillsrequiredtoperformthem;whensalarysurveysare

conductedandemployeesarepaidbasedonoccupationtitlesandjobsummaries,

skillrequirementsarebeingvalued.

AmbiguousDefinition

Few“new”ideasincompensationmanagementrepresentacompletebreakfrom

thepriorideas.AlthoughSBPwasbilledasanewideaincompensationwhen

introduced,itincludedoldcompensationpractices,suchascareerladdersand

generalistclassifications.

Theresultisthattoday,whencompaniesaresurveyedtoseeiftheyuseSBP

practices,thosethatuseoldSBPpracticesarecountedamongthefirmsthathave

signedontotheconcept.Thisgivesafalsepictureabouttheadoptionofthis"new”,

wayofpayingemployeesandcontributestovaryingdescriptionsoftheconcept's

levelofacceptance.

Competency-BasedPay

Inthe1990s,competency-basedpaywasintroducedasatypeofSBPplanfor

professionalandmanagerialemployees.Itcallsforbasepaytobedeterminedbased

oncompetenciesinsteadofdutiesandresponsibilities.Shortlyaftertheconceptwas

introduced,controversyaroseastowhatconstitutesalegitimatecompetency.Today,

therearemanyalternativestochoosefrom-core,organizational,behavioraland

technicalcompetencies.Onecompensationexperthasaskedforagoverningbody,

similartothoseintheaccountingprofession,tohelpsortoutwhattheterm

competencyactuallymeansintheworldofemployeecompensation.

Changesintheeconomyandthenatureofwork-suchastheriseofthe

contingentworkforceandthedisappearanceoftraditionaljobs,whichwerepredicted

toresultinaneedforSBP-havenotmaterialized.Thatandthelackof

administrativesupportsystemsprobablyhavecontributedtotheconcept'sslow

growth.Today,SBPisassociatedwithblue-collarworkersinmanufacturingindustries,

whichareindeclineintheUnitedStates,whilecompetency-basedpayhashada

greaterimpactonperformancemanagementthanonbasepay.

Despitetheseissuesandsetbacks,prominentcompensationexpertscontinueto

supporttheconcept.

Broadbanding

Oneofthemostvisibleconceptsincompensationmanagementinthe1990swas

broadbanding,whichcollapsesmanysalarygradesandrangesintofewerbandswith

broadersalaryspans.Itspopularitywasattributedinparttothe1990strendto

downsizeorganizationsbyreducingthenumberofhierarchicallevels.

Whenbroadbandingwasintroduced,somethoughtleaderssawitasanewpay

programformanagingsalariesandsupportingorganizationalinitiatives,suchas

eliminatingbureaucracyandreducingcosts.Otherssawitasa“higherorderof

change^^andanewwayofmanaginghumanresourcesthatwouldbeacatalystfor

organizationalchangeandrepresentmuchmorethananewwaytoreduce

bureaucracyandcosts.

Theconceptwaslooselydefined,andcompaniesweresaidtohavewelcomed

theopportunitytoadaptittotheiruniqueneeds.Andsomeweregivencreditfor

adoptingit,eventhoughonecitedplanhad13bands,withmultiplesalaryranges

withinthem,makingitresembleatraditionalsalaryadministrationplan.

Flexibility

Oneconstantinthedialogueonbroadbandingisthatitprovidestheflexibilityto

accommodatechangeandtodefinejobresponsibilitiesmorebroadly.Proponents

havedismissedtraditionalsalaryadministrationsystemsasbeingtoostructured,with

toomanyrules.

ExecutionIssues

Earlyexperiencewithbroadbandingwasnotcompletelypositive.Althoughthese

systemsweresupposedtoreducecosts,managershadtoomuchdiscretiontoincrease

salarieswithinthebands.Afterseveralyears,salarieshadprogressedtolevelsthat

couldnotbejustified.

“Secondgeneration^^bandedsystemsgavelessfreedomformanagersto

determinesalaries.Thesesystemsincludemorebandsandspecificallydefinesalary

rangeswithinthebands,makingthemresemblethetraditionalsystemstheywere

supposedtoreplace.

Twocompensationtextbookshavereservedfinaljudgmentonthevalueof

broadbanding.Oneseesitasapotentialrepriseofthetypeofsalaryadministration

“flexibility“thatgaverisetothetraditionalplans.Theseplansweredevelopedto

reducefavoritismandinconsistenciesthatresultedfromalackofstructureand

controlsthatexistinbroadbanding.

TotalRewards

Inthepastdecade,professionalassociations,majorhumanresourceconsulting

firmsandcompensationexpertshaveadvocatedthetotalrewardsapproachtothe

developmentofafirm9srewardsstrategy.Somebilleditasmorethanapassingphase

andpossiblythegreatestbreakthroughincompensationsincehealthcareplanswere

combinedwithpaypackages.

TheapproachcallsforHRprofessionalstoconsiderallaspectsofthework

experienceofvaluetopeoplewhendevelopingastrategytoattract,retainand

motivateemployees.Itextendsthepriorconceptoftotalcompensation,which

encompassedonlypayandbenefitprograms,andgivesformtoanideadescribedina

compensationtextbookwidelyusedinthe1970s.Thus,theideaismorenovelthan

radical.

Intheearly2000s,aftertheintensecompetitionfortalentandtheeconomyof

the1990shadcooled,employerssoughtwaystoreducecostsandneededastrategy

thatplacesmoreemphasisonlow-costrewardsandlessoncostlypayandbenefit

programs,suchasstockoptions.Totalrewardsmeetsthatneedwithitsmessagethat

learninganddevelopment,recognitionandothersoft-dollarprogramsareasimportant

aspayandbenefitsinsatisfyingemployees.Inaddition,itprovidesaflexibleand

broadarrayofrewardsthatrespondswelltoglobalization,mergersandacquisitions,

andotherforcesthatincreaseworkforcediversity.

ExecutionIssues

Thelaunchoftotalrewardsconfirmedtheaxiomthatnewcompensation

programstypicallyaresimpleinconcept,butcomplexinexecution.WhenHR

practitionersputtheconceptintopractice,theyencounteredmanystumblingblocks.

Thatledtwoconsultantstodescribehumanresourceprofessionalsinlate2004as

"feelingconfusedorsensingchaosregardingtotalrewards."Aprimarycauseofthe

confusionwasexpertswhouseddifferentnames,definitionsandmodelstodescribeit.

Correctiveactionsweretakentoaddresstheseissues,coursesweredevelopedontotal

rewardsmanagementandthebasicconceptwassimplified.

Still,compensationprofessionalsarelikelytouseothertermstorefertoit,with

thelabelsforoutdatedrewardstrategies—compensationandbenefitspackageand

totalcompensation-beingusedaboutasfrequentlyasthenewterm.

Conclusions

Insum,newconceptsincompensationmanagementhavethefollowinggeneral

profile:

?Arenovel,butnotradicallynew

?Aresimpleinconcept,butcomplexinexecution

?Donotalwayshaveexpertagreementonmaintenets

?Overlapwithpriorconcepts,creatingamisleadingimpressionabouttheir

adoption

?Resultinmajorexecutionissues,largelybecauseofconceptualconfusion

?Donotreachexpectedadoptionfigures

?Haveaplaceinthefield,butnotadominantrole.

Giventhispattern,compensationprofessionalsareadvisedtoexaminenew

conceptscloselytoseeiftheideasaretoobroadlydefined,reflectexpert

agreement,representsignificantchangeandprovideguidanceonexecutionandbest

applications.Inaddition,practitionersshouldcloselyreviewusagesurveysofnew

conceptstodetermineifaconcept'sbroaddefinitionandhistoricalrootshavecaused

relatedpriorpracticestobecountedasevidenceofthenewone'sacceptance.They

alsoshouldseekinformationastowhyorganizationshaveturneddownorstopped

usinganewconcept.And,attheriskofappearingbehindthetimes,theywould

bewell-advisedtowaituntiltheknowledgebaseontheconcepthasbeenfully

developedbeforeadoptingit.

Source:InternationalFoundationNews,2009(5):pl2-15.

譯文:

薪酬管理新概念的理解框架

法蘭克?詹科拉

在過去的25年里，幾個主要的薪酬管理的新理念過于反映其雄心勃勃的目

標(biāo)。專家們不認(rèn)同他們的基本前提，商界也很難以接受這些概念。研究分析技能

薪酬、寬帶薪酬和整體薪酬這三個概念的歷史是非常有用的，因為它揭示了他們

面臨的挑戰(zhàn)并且為如何處理這些和其他行業(yè)的新思想界定了一個模式。

技能薪酬體系

技能薪酬的基本工資的確定方法是基于雇員的技能，而不是他或她目前的工

作。從20世紀(jì)80年代以來領(lǐng)先的思想家就支持這種薪酬管理方法。按薪酬專家

帕特里夏和杰伊舒斯特說法，這是“下一個美妙的報酬和福利”。在一次采訪中

愛德華勞勒稱它是“未來的薪酬制度。”

這種方法將焦點從工作本身轉(zhuǎn)移到人上，為了更有效地激勵員工提高技能

并使得對勞動力的管理更具多變性。一般來說，員工的薪水取決于他們?yōu)榱嗽谧?/p>

己的領(lǐng)域或其他相關(guān)領(lǐng)域里獲得較高的技能。從系統(tǒng)的觀點來看，工作說明、工

作評價計劃和基于工作的薪酬調(diào)查被技能概況，技能鑒定計劃和技能型工資調(diào)查

取而代之。

傳統(tǒng)工作的消失為這種變化提供了主要依據(jù)。今天，據(jù)說員工接受了多樣的

和不穩(wěn)定的工作任務(wù)，且在傳統(tǒng)評價計劃當(dāng)中對配置有效工資率沒有作用。

有爭議的原則

主要的技能薪酬原則與主流商業(yè)思維的沖突。第一個原則是這種工資應(yīng)僅僅

基于技能，而員工為組織工作的價值與薪酬的計算毫無關(guān)系。事實上，SBP運動

倡導(dǎo)者要求薪酬管理人員根據(jù)員工的技能給他們同樣的工資標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，即使他們可能

完全不符合職責(zé)，或者為公司的成功提供不同的服務(wù)。公司基本價值的一些漏洞

使得這種觀念很難被管理者與員工所接受。近年來,補償專家認(rèn)定工作的價值是

工資支付方程的重要組成部分。

第二個原則是，薪酬的確定是基于員工他們掌握了多少技能或是多少工作他

們有潛力去做，而不是他們現(xiàn)在的崗位。在這里，技能薪酬倡導(dǎo)者把許多公司考

慮不合理的要求。他們引入一個有爭議的潛在的薪酬概念，這個概念直接違背了

一些專業(yè)人員一直努力建立的績效薪酬觀念。近年來，重點是了解員工在工作中

真實表現(xiàn)，而不是有關(guān)他們是誰的一些靜態(tài)的概念如他們管理的潛力的或工齡。

同時,通過詢問企業(yè)向員工支付的工資,他們可能在未來執(zhí)行,技能薪酬是幾家實

踐的公司能負(fù)擔(dān)的。有了這些核心信仰，技能薪酬經(jīng)歷了一場艱苦的戰(zhàn)斗，為了

以驗收為主要手段來確定基本工資。

可疑的假設(shè)

技能薪酬概念是基于一種可疑的假設(shè)--份工作不反映該人的技能應(yīng)該

需要做的。那使工作評估方案為評估技能和設(shè)定工資率提供了一個不恰當(dāng)?shù)姆?/p>

法。根據(jù)技能薪酬倡導(dǎo)者主張,技能必須通過市場技能調(diào)查來加以重視。他們忽

視一個事實,那就是多數(shù)點因素工作評價計劃給予了他們大量的觀點，為占有和

應(yīng)用的知識,技能和能力。在這一點上，勞勒曾表示，“在很多情況下，這個（技能

薪酬）不會與以崗位為基礎(chǔ)的薪酬產(chǎn)生迥然不同的工資支付水平。畢竟,人們的技

能與他們正在做的工作通常都非常的匹配?！?/p>

同時也忽略了一個事實是，許多職業(yè)（例如會計、電工、精算）確實反映它們

的執(zhí)行過程所需的技能；當(dāng)進行工資調(diào)查時，發(fā)現(xiàn)員工的工資是基于職業(yè)頭銜和

工作總結(jié)，技能需求正在被重視。

歧義的定義

一些薪酬管理領(lǐng)域中的“新”理念代表一個徹底從舊理念擺脫出來的完整的

想法。雖然技能薪酬引入時被認(rèn)為是薪酬領(lǐng)域中的新理念,但這也包括一些老薪

酬管理實踐，比如職業(yè)階梯和多樣化的分類。

結(jié)果是，今天當(dāng)公司被調(diào)查看看他們是否使用技能薪酬管理,那些使用舊技

能薪酬管理公司的確定是在那些已經(jīng)同意這個概念的公司范圍里。這給一個虛假

的關(guān)于這個“新”理念的可行性，薪酬支付的方法以及有助于分類描述這個概念

的接受程度的假象。

能力薪酬體系

在20世紀(jì)90年代,為了技術(shù)型和管理型員工，能力薪酬作為技能薪酬體系

的一種類型引進。它要求基本工資決定要基于能力，而不是義務(wù)和責(zé)任。這個概

念被引入不久，就引起了爭議，爭議內(nèi)容主要是關(guān)于什么才是一種合理和符合工

作要求的能力。今天，有很多可以選擇的能力，如綜合、組織、行為和技術(shù)能力。

一位薪酬專家已要求一家類似在會計專業(yè)方面的管理機構(gòu),來幫助解決何謂能力

的問題，實際上意味著，在世界上的雇員薪酬。

作為專業(yè)人士一直掙扎于術(shù)語的意思,按能力支付工資的形式更多的使用在

績效管理中（41%接受調(diào)查的公司），而不是使用在基本工資確定上（1蜴接受調(diào)查

的公司），這個發(fā)展技能薪酬的倡導(dǎo)者沒有預(yù)測到。

經(jīng)濟形勢和工資性質(zhì)的變化，諸如員工隊伍的提升和傳統(tǒng)工作的消失，這被

認(rèn)為將導(dǎo)致對技能薪酬體系的需求。今天，以上的變化和行政支持系統(tǒng)的缺乏可

能已經(jīng)助長這一概念緩慢發(fā)展，技能薪酬與制造行業(yè)中藍領(lǐng)工人聯(lián)系在一起，這

一現(xiàn)象出現(xiàn)在美國經(jīng)濟衰退時期，以能力為基礎(chǔ)的薪酬支付形式在績效管理中比

以基本工資支付薪酬形式更具有影響力。

盡管有這些問題與挫折,著名的薪酬管理專家繼續(xù)支持這個概念。

寬帶薪酬

二十世紀(jì)九十年代的一個在薪酬管理方面最顯著的觀念是寬帶薪酬，寬帶薪

酬使得原先的許多薪酬等級和分類轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)楦俚膶挾群透鼜V的薪水跨度。

當(dāng)寬帶薪酬被引進的時候，一些人認(rèn)為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者把它看成一種新的薪酬管理和

支持組織積極性的方式，比如消除組織官僚主義，減少組織開銷。還有一些人視

它為“更有序的轉(zhuǎn)變”和一種人力資源管理的新方式，就好比是組織變革的催化

劑，代表了一種不僅僅在減少組織官僚主義和花費方面的新方式。

這個概念被廣泛的定義，據(jù)說公司已經(jīng)歡迎這種機會去迎合他們的各自需

求。一些公司甚至貸款去采用它，雖然一個被引用的計劃有13等級