Skip to content

Une approche équilibrée à la rémunération des hauts dirigeants

21 décembre 2014

Récemment, nous avons abordé l’épineuse question du benchmarking dans l’établissement de la rémunération des hauts dirigeants et montré les effets insidieux de l’utilisation de cette approche.

Aujourd’hui, je vous propose la lecture d’un court article paru sur le site de Equilar. Les auteurs suggèrent la considération de trois pratiques exemplaires pour la fixation de rémunérations équilibrée et justes.

1. Mettez l’accent sur des comparaisons réalistes de l’univers des pairs;

2. Divulguez vos critères de choix;

3. Assurez-vous de bien démontrer comment la rémunération est liée à la performance, notamment à la performance de l’entreprise à long terme.

Bonne lecture ! Vos commentaires sont les bienvenus.

Executive Compensation Benchmarking: 3 Best Practices

Determining compensation is a process of comparison. What’s a candidate worth to the organization in relation to others? What if this candidate took their talents elsewhere? What could they expect to earn from another employer? How does location, industry, and company size play into the picture?

When you’re dealing with compensation at the executive level, the stakes become higher and the compensation package more nuanced, which means the process of comparison becomes more complex.023

Initially, attracting and motivating executive talent involves a large investment. And without performance-based incentives, annual salary increases can become an expectation rather than a reward.

On one end of the spectrum, ineffective benchmarking can lead to underperformance, over-inflated salaries, and sometimes even negative media coverage. On the other end of the spectrum, you don’t want to undercompensate talented executives and leave them feeling unmotivated—or worse—lose them to a competitor with better pay.

Effective executive compensation benchmarking can help an organization keep high-performers happy and motivated while staying out of the media spotlight. Use the following best practices to do it right.

1. Focus on authentic peer comparisons

Avoid the trap of performing “peer comparisons” using oversimplified criteria. In order to get an authentic benchmark, use more complex data mining. For example, not every CEO of a mid-sized organization in Silicon Valley deserves to be compensated at the same level as one who has just successfully led their company through an IPO. Factors like profitability are critical to getting an accurate compensation benchmark. Alternatively, age may be a completely irrelevant data point in determining appropriate peer comparisons.

2. Don’t dodge disclosure

The clarity with which your organization justifies compensation is important. When you can easily—and clearly—disclose data-driven justification for your compensation decisions, you’re supporting an atmosphere of transparency. And with transparency comes investor, client, and consumer confidence.

3. Bring up performance

Executive compensation packages that link pay to performance are critical in an era of increased scrutiny from institutional investors, regulatory agencies, proxy advisors, and shareholders. Incentive plans also benefit the executive and the organization with clear, detailed annual and long-term incentive points.

Laisser un commentaire

Qu'en pensez-vous ?

Entrer les renseignements ci-dessous ou cliquer sur une icône pour ouvrir une session :

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion / Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion / Changer )

Connexion à %s

%d blogueurs aiment ce contenu :