Loyalty discount: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Over time, those who remain loyal to the firm are ''penalised''. The only way to correct this — to [[mark-to-market|mark yourself to market]] — is to [[lateral quitter|join a competitor]]. | Over time, those who remain loyal to the firm are ''penalised''. The only way to correct this — to [[mark-to-market|mark yourself to market]] — is to [[lateral quitter|join a competitor]]. | ||
To be sure, salaries may drift upwards, decade by decade, courtesy of HR’s finely honed calculus, | To be sure, salaries may drift upwards, decade by decade, courtesy of HR’s finely honed calculus, predicated as it is on abstract, but unshakable logic: a director is worth more than an associate director; a good associate director worth more than a bad one, and so on. All true, and fair, in ''the abstract'', but here is the thing. Employees don’t ''work'' in the abstract. Only [[averagism|averages]] do. | ||
But the [[Modernist|modern]] world ''loves'' its archetypes. Just as the [[common law]] has its [[reasonable person]], economics its rational one, the boxwallahs of [[personnel]] have their average employee. | |||
But ''there is no average employee''. This abstract average is an emergent property of an unstable group. | |||
It includes the young savant, who with rude haste will be catapulted out of the cohort to bigger, brighter things, and the [[weak gazelle]] who should. insh’Allah, be torpedoed from it in the next [[RIF]]. Neither will be there in a year's time. Those who much around the median have different skills, different attributes, bring different sets of tools to the table.<ref>Well, ''theoretically'' they should. Whether they ''do'' the firm’s recruiting methodology allows this is another question. If you only hire Russell Group graduates and laterals with Magic circle experience, we are talking about you.</ref>Yet [[HR]] insists on drawing an average from these varying trajectories and holding everyone to it.. No single employee at any time has both characteristics. -one at the firm operates in the abstract | |||
{{Sa}} | {{Sa}} | ||
*[[Lateral hire]] | *[[Lateral hire]] | ||
Revision as of 08:25, 23 November 2022
|
The Human Resources military-industrial complex
|
Loyalty discount
ˈlɔɪəlti ˈdɪskaʊnt (n.)
The great falsification of the human resources dogma.
For the strictures of salary bands, forced ranking, gerrymandered performance appraisal system — all the great apocrypha of the HR canon — mean that through time how much a given employee is paid will decouple from whatever value she offers the firm, however meagre.[1]
Over time, those who remain loyal to the firm are penalised. The only way to correct this — to mark yourself to market — is to join a competitor.
To be sure, salaries may drift upwards, decade by decade, courtesy of HR’s finely honed calculus, predicated as it is on abstract, but unshakable logic: a director is worth more than an associate director; a good associate director worth more than a bad one, and so on. All true, and fair, in the abstract, but here is the thing. Employees don’t work in the abstract. Only averages do.
But the modern world loves its archetypes. Just as the common law has its reasonable person, economics its rational one, the boxwallahs of personnel have their average employee.
But there is no average employee. This abstract average is an emergent property of an unstable group.
It includes the young savant, who with rude haste will be catapulted out of the cohort to bigger, brighter things, and the weak gazelle who should. insh’Allah, be torpedoed from it in the next RIF. Neither will be there in a year's time. Those who much around the median have different skills, different attributes, bring different sets of tools to the table.[2]Yet HR insists on drawing an average from these varying trajectories and holding everyone to it.. No single employee at any time has both characteristics. -one at the firm operates in the abstract
See also
References
- ↑ As we have remarked elsewhere, it is more or less axiomatic that all employees contribute some positive value to their organisation. Except, possibly, the unnamed Italian hospital worker who bunked off for fifteen years.
- ↑ Well, theoretically they should. Whether they do the firm’s recruiting methodology allows this is another question. If you only hire Russell Group graduates and laterals with Magic circle experience, we are talking about you.