Take your fairness and . . .

Joe,

I do love it when we find an issue where we can disagree.

First, let me start out by saying that it should be a primary concern for all businesses to ensure that nothing in their practices discriminates against any person on the basis of race, gender, race, ethnic origins, sexual orientation, disability, etc. The type of fairness I'm talking about is not in the realm of this type of illegal and unethical injustice. That being said, you raise some interesting ideas in your post.

The idea of employee perception trumping all is an important one. But, if you let your company be run by employee perception and become a slave to it, I think you will be in trouble quickly. It's important to understand the significance of employee perception and then work to use that to create positive results.

An approach like pay transparency might seem like a good idea in concept but is often a train wreck in actual practice for a variety of reasons. Companies like Lominger who have studied performance and development have shown that we as individuals have a very warped sense of our own abilities and performance. As you would expect, most individuals will rate their own skills and abilities much higher than others will. Naturally, we are biased. Based on this "perception" of our value, we make a determination of the fairness of our compensation (by extension also inflated). Granted, in a few rare companies out there, pay transparency might work well, but in most places, it adds fuel to a already very hot fire.

In my opinion, productive fairness is achieved through clarity of expectation and consistency of practice. While our systems of measurement for employee performance are certainly flawed and incomplete, that doesn't mean that we don't know what matters and aren't able to recognize those things. The key is to clearly define and make apparent those things that matter and reward those things consistently. In regards to how we reward those things, I agree with you that organizations should pay more attention to what matters to their employees and reward them in ways that matter most.

For me, it boils down to this. People are not entitled to be treated how they perceive they should be treated at all times. Employers are entitled to create cultures and environments that (unfairly or not) reward certain types of behaviors and performance over others. Employees are entitled to leave and find another job when they find themselves at a company where they feel the situation is unfair. Employers are entitled to reward the things they think matter and to suffer the consequences. This is the balance in the system. In order for these circumstances to have a positive effect for the organization, there has to be clarity around what's expected and how that will be rewarded.

Done right, this system will feel very fair to the people who are making things happen to drive the business forward and will feel unfair to those who aren't. Businesses who reward the wrong things will find themselves out of business. That seems fair to me.

-Jason

It Just Isn't Fair

Joe,

Greetings. I have returned from a ski weekend where the mountain helped charge my batteries and clear my mind. It was a fabulous weekend and it's time to get back to work. We've been on a bit of a hiatus here at the blog lately but I think it's time to get back to work on some interesting topics.

Just recently, an invitation came across my desk to attend an HR seminar regarding how to keep the workplace more fair and equitable for employees. The thing that struck me about the session description was that it was clearly assumed that fairness and equity should be a primary objective for HR professionals. This made my stomach turn. Here's why.

Generally, when we talk about fairness or equity in HR, it generally boils down to money. Our employees look at their paycheck and they make judgments about whether their pay is fair relative to what they know (or assume) about other's pay. HR departments seem to really struggle with this issue because they lose sight of the reason we compensate people. Quick definition of "fairness" from dictionary.com:

• free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice
• proper under the rules

Where HR should focus is on making sure that inappropriate or illegal bias and discrimination have no place in work policies and practices. However, it seems that in our attempts to remove these biases, we have become an impediment to allowing our businesses to invest in their best people.

Money is still the most powerful incentive in place for employees at work (don't believe me? stop paying someone at work today and see how long they keep coming back). We should use our money to invest in and reward the people who create the most value for our companies. This often doesn't look "fair" to everyone because two employees who HR might say are "equals" based on pay range and job grade, might be paid very differently because one of the people is brilliant with customers or great at coming up with new product ideas (thus being worth more to the company's bottom line).

The bottom line for me is this. HR should absolutely work towards driving discrimination out of company practices; that's a must. However, all things are never equal. Some people will always be more valuable to the organization than others. HR should spend far less time enforcing their own made up pay rules and far more time trying to help their organizations invest their money in the people who are making things happen. In fact, let's not stop with pay. It's okay to give your top performers privileges that others don't have. Not only will you keep more of your top performers around, but you might just create an incentive for some of your other employees to step up to greatness. It probably isn't fair, but can make all the difference.

-Jason