Towers watson Balancing employer and employee benefits


Published on

1 Comment
No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Towers watson Balancing employer and employee benefits

  1. 1. The Next High-Stakes Quest Balancing Employer and Employee Priorities2012 – 2013Global Talent Management and Rewards Study
  2. 2. The Next High-Stakes QuestBalancing Employer and Employee Priorities Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Key Findings 4 Introduction 5 The Stragetic Value of the EVP 6 What Outcomes Can an Organization Achieve From its EVP? 9 Gains in Attraction, Retention and Sustainable Engagement 9 Building Blocks for Effective Design and Delivery 10 Best Practices in Design, Delivery and Execution Within the Total Rewards Portfolio 14 Processes and Tools That Support Effective Execution 18 Conclusion 22 About the Study 23 Key Terms and Definitions 24 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 1
  3. 3. Executive Summary What Fuels Your Organization? to increase their global competitiveness. Almost three in four organizations report difficulties attracting In today’s volatile global economy, organizations critical-skill employees, and more than half report are struggling to establish and maintain an effective difficulties retaining them. and affordable attraction, retention and engagement strategy. Our research also found that not all employers are taking advantage of opportunities to attract and Along with accelerating changes in talent markets retain high-value employees by offering the rewards and workforce demographics that affect how most important to them. Growing global competition employers find and keep employees, cost challenges leaves the demand for the right talent as strong as continue to play a major role — and will do so in the ever, and drives the stakes for attracting, keeping and decades to come. In fact, for companies in many engaging critical-skill talent even higher. parts of the world, cost containment remains the greatest concern. In addition, data from our 2012 Global Workforce Study (see About the Global Workforce Study, Not in recent history have we seen such rapid page 23) show that employees are experiencing movement in economies, and workforce demand and high levels of stress at work. In the Talent availability. Even as organizations continue to rein Management and Rewards Survey, more than half in operational costs, many push expectations for of all employers report that employees have been employee and financial performance ever higher. As a working more hours than normal for the past three result, the workforce is often providing greater efforts years. Nearly as many employers (43%) say they without the promise of greater rewards. expect to maintain that pace for the next three So it’s no surprise that the 2012 – 2013 Talent years as well. Management and Rewards Survey, which surveyed As they shoulder these growing challenges, it’s no 1,605 employers globally, finds that companies are wonder employees are increasingly anxious, risk- having difficulty attracting and retaining the high- averse and security-minded. In the Global Workforce potential and critical-skill employees necessary Study (GWS), workers continue to express serious “Not in recent history have we seen such rapid movement in economies, and workforce demand and availability.”2
  4. 4. “As they shoulder these growing challenges, it’s no wonder employees are increasingly anxious, risk-averse and security-minded.” doubts about accountability, preparedness for their volatility, their focus needs to be on crafting and futures, career advancement and, most critically, communicating an employee value proposition (EVP) rewards for their performance. that helps to attract and retain employees with critical skills, and engage all workers by striking a The complexities of managing a global workforce reasonable balance between employee and employer — addressing external factors affecting the needs. competitiveness of cost structures, sourcing talent and understanding people across cultures — have Achieving these objectives requires focusing scarce rendered the work environment unsettling, at best, program resources on the key drivers of sustainable for both employers and employees. And through this engagement, and sharpening and differentiating the uncertainty, one constant is the pressure to tightly organization’s EVP for critical employee segments. manage costs. Some companies are more effective at this Organizations continue to shift some of their than others. The result? Organizations that have increasing cost and risk burden onto employees, segmented the workforce and that deliver customized while at the same time trying to find a formula EVPs for critical employee segments are nearly twice to avoid the potential impacts of this strategy on as likely as companies with more tactical and less attraction, retention and business performance. integrated EVPs to report financial performance substantially above their peer group. None of which speaks to engagement, which will be threatened if this pace continues. Employers have This report will explain the definition of sustainable essentially driven higher performance while engagement and the evolution of the EVP We will . at the same time depleting the fuel that powers the also review the total rewards best practices employed engine of the organization. Asking employees to by successful organizations and the positive work so hard for so long is unhealthy for individual outcomes they are experiencing. Understanding employees as well as the organization itself. these concepts, and the impact they have on the organization and the workforce, can help any However, while this report presents a frank organization — at any level of development — perspective on today’s work environment, it also improve future results. highlights the organizations that get the employer- employee balance right — and win significant returns from doing so. As employers endeavor to deliver profitable growth in a period of economic 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 3
  5. 5. Key Findings Attraction Segmentation and Differentiation • Almost three-quarters of survey respondents • Only 18% of the survey respondents have (72%) cite problems attracting critical-skill differentiated their EVP from other organizations employees. with whom they compete for talent. • About six in 10 have difficulty attracting high- • Organizations that have segmented the workforce potential and top-performing workers (60% and and that deliver customized EVPs for critical 59%, respectively). employee segments are nearly twice as likely as • In addition, 43% have problems attracting diverse companies with more tactical and less integrated employee populations. EVPs (27.6% versus 14.5%, respectively) to report financial performance substantially above their Retention peer group. • Almost six in 10 companies report difficulty retaining critical-skill employees; similar Measurement and Monitoring proportions have difficulty retaining high-potential • Organizations with a highly effective EVP are employees and top performers. more than twice as likely to capture external • More than four in 10 respondents also cite issues benchmarking data on talent management retaining employees with tenures of 18 months to programs, and about 60% more likely to examine three years. trends in total rewards program design, than companies with less developed or poorly executed Sustainable Engagement EVPs. They are also about 60% more likely to • Employers that have segmented the workforce assess business performance and conduct other and deliver customized EVPs for critical employee analytics to review total rewards programs. segments are more than four times as likely to • Eight in 10 organizations with highly effective report that their employees are highly engaged EVPs regularly monitor the effectiveness of most than organizations with more tactical, less of their programs, far above the rate of other integrated EVPs. organizations. • More than three times as many employees (58% versus 16%) are highly engaged at companies that have highly effective EVPs than at companies with low EVP effectiveness. What Financially High-Performing Companies Get Right Financially high-performing organizations stood out in this On the other hand, they experience different attraction and year’s Talent Management and Rewards Survey as exemplars of retention risks as well. Employees working in financially high- engagement and performance. Why? One reason is they exhibit performing companies report much less ability to manage work- dramatically stronger consistency in global talent management related stress, and they feel excessive pressure in their jobs, and reward program design, in many cases, with 20% to 30% although they want to stay even if work is available elsewhere. higher prevalence in design consistency than other survey They also report lower levels of trust in senior leadership. participants. While global program design consistency may not make sense Almost invariably, financially high-performing companies achieve when there are varying needs across different employee consistency and integration in the design and administration of populations, the trade-off is very often worthwhile, given programs — not just for leadership, but for all employees. Not the correlation with higher financial results. But even high- surprisingly, financially high-performing companies also enjoy performing companies need to take care, and be sure to advantages in attracting and retaining employees. follow through on the leadership and work/life balance promised by their EVP .4
  6. 6. IntroductionA Real-Time Strategy for Achieving Figure 1. Difficulties attracting and retaining key employee groups continuethe Right Balance despite variable economic conditionsIn this, the 17th year of our global research on To what extent is your organization experiencing problems attracting/retaining Problemstalent management and reward trends, it’s never employees in the following groups? attracting* Problems retaining*been more important to get the balance between All employees 31% 25%employer and employee priorities right. And ourfindings indicate there is a prescription for doing Critical-skill employees 72% 56%so: ensuring workers get what they need in such a High-potential employees 60% 55%way that the organization realizes healthier financial Top-performing employees 59% 50%results, improved employee engagement, and an Diverse employee populations 43% 31%easier time attracting and retaining people with the Recent university graduates 18% 20%skills they need (Figure 1). Employees with tenures between 18 monthsAlthough it may require a journey through several and three years NA 43%levels of difficulty to achieve and maintain such *Percentages represent the percentage of respondents having difficulty to a moderate or great extent.a balance, the quest begins with the formalarticulation of the EVP Each step beyond that .is progressively more valuable as organizations denotes the intensity of employees’ connection tostrengthen, sharpen, segment and differentiate their their organization. We view sustainable engagementemployee deal. as more than a willingness to give discretionaryThe journey can be rewarding for the whole effort. In a high-pressure business environment, iforganization — right from the beginning. Even the employees are to contribute fully to driving financialfirst level (i.e., articulating a formal strategy) brings success, they require the energy to maintain theirfinancial returns to the organization. However, efforts and the enablement to overcome obstaclescommunicating and delivering on EVP promises, to productive work.segmenting the workforce to create differentiated Sustainable engagement is thus marked byEVPs for critical workforce segments, and developing committed effort to achieve goals and objectives inassociated total rewards programs can produce a environments that maintain productive, energizedtreasure trove of higher sustainable engagement performance. Employees who are highly engaged areand better financial performance. not only engaged, but also enabled and energized —Part of the solution — for companies and workers by their managers, leadership and the organization’salike — lies in sustainable engagement, which employee deal.“Sustainable engagement is thus marked by committed effort co to achi e goals and objectives in enviro achieve goal s environments tha maintain environments that ronm productive, energized perf rm ro tiv nergize performa ve, er iz performance.” rg zed rform 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 5
  7. 7. The Strategic Value of the EVP EVP is a term that has become increasingly familiar differentiate themselves from their competitors. over the past several years. But although cited A strategically designed EVP attracts, retains, frequently, it’s often misunderstood. The EVP is an motivates and engages employees to help drive implicit contract, or deal, between employer and business success. employee, articulating the nature of the experience For employees, well-designed total rewards the employer offers in exchange for the employee’s programs are the embodiment of the business dedication, productivity and sustainable engagement. strategy, informing every aspect of how they will be The EVP defines “the give and the get” between compensated for their efforts. A well-executed total company and worker, encompassing every aspect rewards program design shapes their overall view, of the employment experience — from the emotional connection and the level of discretionary organization’s mission and values; to jobs, culture effort employees will bring to their company. and colleagues; to the full portfolio of total rewards A company’s total rewards program is a key programs. Articulated and executed well, the EVP component of the EVP — typically the aspect that can position a company’s employment deal as makes the EVP most visible to employees. As you’ll unique and help bind employees to the organization. find in this report, companies that have adopted an Having a relevant and sustainable EVP is vital, increasingly integrated approach to reward strategy, particularly in a highly competitive global talent design and delivery decisions — supported by market. For employers, the design of talent an overarching EVP — have achieved significantly management and reward programs is perhaps the stronger outcomes from their talent management area in which they have the most opportunity to and reward programs. EVP Development: The Four Groups On the whole, the formal employee deal is still a relatively new objectives for each reward and talent management program. concept for many organizations. Organizations facing tighter It should be noted that some lessening of attraction and labor markets, such as those in fast-growing economies, are retention difficulties, an increase in highly engaged employees considerably more likely than those in developed economies to and better financial outcomes can be seen as soon as an have an articulated EVP in place. organization articulates its EVP . Our survey identified four groups (see The Towers Watson Group 3. Have effectively communicated their EVP to EVP and Total Rewards Index, page 7) of organizations along employees and delivered on their EVP promises. the EVP evolutionary process across our global sample. Group 4. Have differentiated their EVP from other organizations Group 1. Have not progressed in developing a total rewards with whom they compete for talent and have customized EVPs approach or a formal, articulated EVP . for critical workforce segments. This group is more likely to achieve better outcomes than their peers: fewer attraction Group 2. Have formally articulated an EVP and adopted a total and retention difficulties, more highly engaged employees and rewards approach. There is a greater focus on an integrated better financial outcomes. strategy for managing rewards and talent, and they have stated Segmenting and Differentiating Communicating and Integrated and Delivering Group 4 Strategic Group 3 18% Tactical Group 2 23% Group 1 26% 32% Percentages represent companies in each group across the global sample.6
  8. 8. The Towers Watson EVP and Total Rewards IndexOur EVP and Total Rewards Index (EVP and TR Index) measures a company’s progress in creating,communicating and delivering its EVP and total rewards strategy — and differentiating itself fromother organizations with which it competes for talent. Companies that score the highest on theEVP and TR Index (Group 4) demonstrate better financial performance, more sustainable engagement,and stronger attraction and retention results than companies that score lower (Groups 1 – 3).To create the EVP and TR Index, we assessed (and assigned a relative score) to all companies in thisyear’s Talent Management and Reward Study across 10 questions about creating, communicating,delivering and differentiating the EVP .The following checklists were developed from the questions we asked about organizations’ progress withregard to total rewards and the EVP Together, they create a road map for employers that seek to achieve .sustainable engagement of the workforce and globally competitive financial performance.Benchmarks of an Effective EVP Total Rewards Elements• Developing a formal EVP • Articulating a total rewards strategy aligned with• Effectively communicating the EVP to employees the business and HR strategy• Aligning the EVP with what the organization • Using business strategy and objectives to inform stands for in the marketplace talent management and reward programs• Delivering on EVP promises • Creating specific objectives for each talent• Differentiating the company from competitors in management and reward program to align them the labor market with the EVP• Designing customized EVPs for critical employee • Employing organizational analytics (i.e., business segments performance analytics, workforce demographics, workforce performance data) to test the effectiveness of total rewards programsEVP and TR IndexThe EVP and TR Index measures a company’s success in creating, communicating, delivering and differentiating its EVP. Attraction and retention Sustainable engagement Financial performance Outcomes Job architecture Performance- Career and Foundational based environmental Performance Managerial and job Competencies management Technology effectiveness rewards rewards rewards leveling Strategy gmentatio Design Se n EV Di n P and T R ff e r e n t i a ti o D eliver y Supporting tools and processes 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 7
  9. 9. The Role of Measurement About two-thirds of the organizations in Group 4, for example, collect line manager and senior leadership To interpret the progress an organization makes feedback — as well as conduct employee opinion along the EVP and total rewards journey, the results surveys — compared with less than half of Group 1“Measurement and of its programs must be meaningfully evaluated. companies (Figure 2). Measurement plays an important role in determining analytics are critical the efficacy of reward and talent management Group 4 organizations — those that segment in determining programs. Measurement provides directional the workforce and differentiate themselves from the effectiveness of information for the organization — which programs competitors for talent — collect unique data as programs and making are working, which are not — and suggests changes well. They are more than twice as likely to capture that may be needed to specific programs, whether external benchmarking data on talent management course corrections to simple calibrations or wholesale modifications. programs than organizations that have not heighten effectiveness.” progressed in developing a formal EVP Group 4 . Organizations with a highly effective EVP take a organizations are also about 60% more likely to more rigorous approach to measurement than those examine trends in total rewards program design. at lower levels of EVP effectiveness. These Group These companies are more rigorous with analytics, 4 organizations also emphasize distinct types of too — again, about 60% more likely to access measurement that provide rich data for workforce business performance analytics, and 70% to 80% analytics and better program decisions. more likely to use workforce demographic and For example, most companies measure certain performance data. traditional benchmarks (e.g., competitive market Measurement and analytics are critical in data on pay and benefit levels) and use widely determining the effectiveness of programs accepted measurement tools such as employee and making course corrections to heighten exit interviews. But companies further along the effectiveness. Organizations with highly effective EVP journey are more likely to employ unique EVPs have a significant advantage over those that measurement methods that assess correspondingly have made less progress: The rigor and innovation more valuable inputs. they apply to measurement are useful in improving their reward programs across the board. Figure 2. Organizations with high EVP effectiveness conduct more workforce analytics Which of the following methods does your organization use to collect data about total rewards? (multiple responses allowed) Global Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Employee and leadership research Conjoint analysis to determine employee reward 12% 7% 12% 10% 22% preferences Employee focus groups 23% 15% 22% 25% 36% Employee opinion surveys 51% 40% 48% 60% 64% Employee exit interviews 58% 53% 56% 66% 62% Line manager feedback 55% 44% 55% 61% 65% Senior leadership feedback 55% 45% 55% 60% 68% External benchmarking Competitive market data on pay and benefit levels 90% 86% 92% 89% 92% External benchmark data on leading talent management practices 48% 32% 48% 53% 67% Data on marketplace prevalence of reward and talent management programs 53% 40% 56% 59% 68% Trends in total rewards design 55% 43% 57% 61% 68% Organizational analytics Business performance analytics 59% 46% 59% 67% 73% Workforce demographic data 45% 34% 48% 49% 59% Workforce performance data 47% 36% 41% 55% 64%8
  10. 10. What Outcomes Can an OrganizationAchieve From Its EVP?Organizations that have made more progress likely to report attraction and retention challenges.toward full realization of a formal EVP and total This is particularly true in fast-growing economies,rewards strategy have achieved superior financial where EVPs are both more prevalent and — in lightperformance. Group 4 companies also report higher of the tighter markets for talent — more needed.sustainable engagement, and have fewer attraction For example, in fast-growing economies, Group 4and retention difficulties. They have done the hard companies are 13% less likely to report difficultywork of evolving their EVP through effective strategy, attracting critical-skill employees and 23% less likelydesign and execution, each element building to have retention problems than less integratedupon the former. And while organizations gain an Group 1 organizations (Figure 3).advantage from having a formally articulated EVP ,the highest value comes from a successful journey In addition, Group 4 organizations are five times asthrough the entire EVP evolution. likely to report their employees as highly engaged than Group 1 organizations. As a result, Group 4In this and subsequent sections, we’ll look at the companies are more than twice as likely to reportrelationship between having a formally articulated achieving financial performance significantly aboveEVP and total rewards strategy — coupled with their peers.successful program design and execution againstthat strategy — and improvements in financial We found similar results when looking at employeeresults, sustainable engagement, and attraction and attitudes in our recent GWS. Employees whoretention outcomes. indicate their employers have an effective EVP are more than three times as likely to be highly engagedGains in Attraction, Retention and as employees who say their organization has lowSustainable Engagement EVP effectiveness (Figure 4).To begin with, companies that have advanced furtherthrough the steps of developing an EVP are lessFigure 3. Organizations that have progressed their EVP and total rewards strategy realize better outcomes Fast-growing Developed Overall Global economies economies Group 1 Group 4 Group 1 Group 4 Group 1 Group 4 Problems attracting critical-skill employees 72% 73% 70% 86% 75% 66% 60% Problems retaining critical-skill employees 56% 58% 50% 78% 60% 49% 40% Financially high-performing organizations 19% 14% 28% 12% 30% 16% 22% Highly engaged employees 13% 6% 27% 6% 30% 6% 26%Figure 4. Employees who believe their organizations have a more effectiveEVP are more likely to be highly engaged Low EVP High EVP Overall effectiveness effectiveness Highly engaged 35% 16% 58% Unsupported 22% 22% 22% Detached 17% 20% 13% Disengaged 26% 42% 8% 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 9
  11. 11. Our GWS also revealed that one reason employees Building Blocks for Effective Design respond so favorably to a well-executed EVP is that and Delivery having a formal EVP — along with the strategy, design and execution that support its realization An effective total rewards strategy optimizes — is strongly related to good communication with the total rewards portfolio to meet business employees. and workforce objectives. There are three core underpinnings that an organization needs to develop Regardless of populations, it’s important to in order to promote effective design and delivery understand how employees respond to their across the total rewards spectrum of foundational, organization’s EVP Employees’ lack of knowledge . performance-based, and career and environmental of the EVP is related to retention risk. Often, those reward programs. These underpinnings are job at risk for leaving don’t know what the employment architecture and job leveling, and an emphasis on deal is, or have unrealistic and unwarranted competencies and workforce segmentation. expectations. Employees may become disengaged (and at risk of leaving) if they think their organization Job Architecture and Job Leveling has failed to deliver on what they believe it has Whether an organization is global or domestic, large promised. or small, formal job architecture — accompanied by a systematic approach to job leveling — establishes the basis for consistency and integration in the design of talent management and reward programs. This best practice enables employers to consistently and fairly apply total rewards programs, and help employees navigate their careers. Organizations also report that doing job leveling well makes workforce analytics and planning easier. Towers Watson’s Perspective on Total Rewards Towers Watson takes an integrated and comprehensive 1. Foundational: Reward programs provided as a condition of view of total rewards and the EVP Our core philosophy . employment, including salary and core benefits incorporates total rewards as a critical element within the 2. Performance-based: Reward programs provided for larger EVP — highlighting our belief that every total rewards superior performance, including incentives program should align with business strategy, optimize an 3. Career and environmental: Rewards that provide an organization’s return on investment and drive required engaging work experience, including career development, employee behaviors. training, work/life balance and flexible work programs Aligning rewards with business results — through business In the broader context, total rewards comprise a major strategy — is an effective way to ensure that reward portion of the deal between employer and employee. In investments achieve organizational goals. A key differentiator today’s volatile global business climate, companies need in our approach is the organization of rewards into three to review and refresh their EVP and total rewards programs categories that align with how employees think about regularly — or they risk losing ground (and people) to more rewards. nimble competitors.10
  12. 12. Figure 5 details to what extent key programs progression, and they link reward and careerreflect global job architecture in the respondent’s programs to a common job architecture. Figure 6organization, from expected highs of 85% in explores this outcome in more depth and showscompensation, and 78% in staffing and selection, to that, in some cases, Group 4 companies sometimesscores just over half in prospective, but increasingly have nearly twice the positive outcomes as theirimportant, areas such as workforce analytics and Group 1 counterparts — at least a 25-percentage-succession management. point gain in all cases. Companies that score higher on the EVP and TR Index are more likely to createOrganizations with more advanced EVPs are much these design linkages, because they pave the waymore likely to align pay progression with career for effective integration and execution downstream. “Organizations with more advanced EVPsFigure 5. Job architecture and job leveling serve as the foundation for effective design and delivery of total are much more likelyrewards programs to align pay progression Percentage agreeing that the following with career progression, programs reflect the global job architecture at and they link reward their organization. Overall Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 and career programs Workforce analytics and planning 56% 35% 53% 58% 80% to a common job Staffing and selection 78% 63% 82% 82% 88% Career management 66% 47% 66% 70% 82% architecture.” Learning and development 67% 50% 68% 68% 84% Performance management 74% 58% 82% 75% 83% Compensation 85% 70% 89% 88% 92% Benefits 63% 51% 60% 66% 78% Total rewards and career framework 69% 47% 73% 72% 86% Succession management 59% 38% 58% 63% 78%Figure 6. Companies with a highly effective EVP are more likely to have a common job architecture,and linked reward and career programs Which of the following statements are true for your organization? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 My company has a common job architecture that is used 60% 72% 79% 87% to define all jobs The reward and career programs at my organization are linked 48% 67% 78% 82% to a common job architecture Pay progression is aligned with career progression at my organization 65% 78% 84% 87% 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 11
  13. 13. Competencies Organizations that put these building blocks in As a best practice, financially high-performing place are significantly more likely to report that companies are much more likely to report that their their performance management programs are development plans are informed by the company’s more effective in communicating performance competencies. While many companies have expectations, rewarding employees based on competency models, high-performing companies are performance, and making the connection between doing more — linking competencies to other reward performance and career management (Figure 7). and talent management programs. Just under half of One of the key challenges that organizations face organizations in our survey report doing so. is that many managers are stretched beyond their“One of the key One key to successful programs is to have globally ability to perform, often having insufficient time to challenges that consistent job levels with scaled competencies handle the people aspects of their job and feeling organizations face is aligned with a job family architecture. This unsupported in the process. Organizations that have that many managers are integrated approach ensures consistency across created the structure necessary to improve their the organization and clarity for employees as they performance management process, through common stretched beyond their seek to understand both their current role, and the job family architecture, job leveling and scaled ability to perform, often skills and experience required to advance along competencies, report that their managers are much having insufficient time possible career paths. more effective in a number of ways (Figure 8). to handle the people aspects of their job and Figure 7. Aligning competencies with job levels correlates with more effective performance feeling unsupported in management processes the process.” Job family architecture, How effective is your organization’s performance management job leveling and scaled Other process in the following areas? competencies organizations Difference Communicating expectations for organizational performance 77% 54% 43% Creating a high-performance culture 73% 44% 66% Linking salary increases to individual performance results 82% 57% 44% Linking bonus payouts to individual performance results 79% 61% 30% Linking bonus payouts to organizational performance results 88% 68% 29% Differentiating pay based on performance even for employees who receive the same performance rating 60% 39% 54% Incorporating competencies into our performance management process 63% 36% 75% Incorporating career development into our performance management process 57% 31% 84% Figure 8. Aligning competencies with job levels supports higher manager effectiveness across performance management and pay Job family architecture, How effective are the managers in your organization in the job leveling and scaled Other following aspects of performance management? competencies organizations Difference Working with employees to set appropriate performance goals for 72% 47% 53% individual performance Giving employees regular coaching and feedback on their 60% 34% 76% performance Conducting career development discussions as part of the 51% 28% 82% performance management process Explaining possible career opportunities or available career 42% 23% 83% paths Fairly reflecting overall performance in the employee’s final 75% 48% 56% performance rating Utilizing performance results to determine development plans 60% 31% 94% Differentiating performance between high and low performers 76% 48% 58% Fairly reflecting performance in pay decisions 74% 49% 51%12
  14. 14. Segmentation Figure 9. Organizations with highly effective EVPs are more likely to segmentAs noted earlier, segmentation of the workforce is their workforces — and communicatea best practice that enables everything from good To what extent do you agree with thestrategy to effective design. But segmentation can following about your organization? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4fall short in execution if delivery does not back up Formally identifies employees with criticalthe prior steps. For example, in all but the most 38% 64% 69% 81% skillseffective EVP companies (Group 4), fewer than half Formally identifies top-performing employees 54% 76% 82% 87%of the organizations that identify high potentials Formally identifies high-potential employees 47% 69% 74% 88%inform them of their status (Figure 9). Informs employees who have been identifiedThis may deprive high-potential employees of access as high-potential employees 23% 33% 38% 65%to programs that might help them grow into theleadership candidates their employers expect themto be. And it creates a needless retention risk. Tomaximize the contribution of their high potentials, “Segmentation of the workforce is a bestorganizations with the best execution notify these practice that enables everything from goodemployees of their status. This best practice laysthe groundwork for ongoing career management, strategy to effective design.”and it signals that employees will experiencedifferentiated treatment in other programs as well. The Importance of Segmentation to Sustainable Engagement One impediment to realizing sustainable engagement is they have the work resources and tools to do an exceptional that many organizations fail to segment the workforce. This job, and more likely to feel their team is able to meet its deprives them of the opportunity to differentiate or formally work challenges effectively. structure recruiting and staffing programs for particular Group 4 organizations are also more likely to take calculated groups of employees. For example, while two-thirds of risks and to have contingency plans for dealing with these employers do formally identify high-potential employees, only risks. And they are more likely to have in place the job 37% actually inform those employees of their status. Not architecture that enables segmentation. Many of these doing so squanders opportunities for valued employees to companies have found that deploying integrated talent and engage in related developmental activities. It also creates reward technology helps them identify, manage and monitor avoidable retention risks. different talent segments. Organizations that effectively segment their workforce While segmentation is not a pure science, the discipline are more likely to reinforce the drivers of enablement. By of thinking about the workforce in differentiated ways, and enablement, we mean employees are less likely to encounter designing and delivering programs accordingly, can lead to obstacles in doing their jobs well, are more likely to believe better results for any organization. 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 13
  15. 15. Best Practices in Design, Delivery Base Pay and Execution Within the Total Rewards Given the importance of base pay as a key global Portfolio driver of both attraction and retention, organizations need to ensure the baseline competitiveness of Design, delivery and execution of total rewards salaries to support their attraction and retention“Design, delivery and are areas in which organizations have the most goals. Best practice organizations ensure opportunity for differentiation. Taken together, these execution of total rewards there is a clear line of sight between employee elements make manifest reward strategy, rendering are areas in which performance and pay. They communicate the value it tangible for employees. After all, the elements of of the employee’s total rewards package through organizations have the talent management and reward programs inform both traditional and innovative means, such as most opportunity for every aspect of how employees will be recognized statements and portals. And they periodically and rewarded for their efforts. differentiation.” assess employee attitudes and reward preferences This section explores best practices in design, through employee surveys, focus groups or a total delivery and execution for key total rewards rewards optimization process. programs — from foundational, to performance- More than twice as many organizations with high based, to career and environmental. EVP and TR Index scores report differentiated base pay as companies with lower scores. Group 4 companies are also about 90% more likely to reportFigure 10. Foundational rewards: Base pay is the number one driver of that their base pay program supports attractionattraction and retention globally and retention goals, as well as the desired culture, To what extent do you agree with the that employees understand the program and that following statements? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 managers execute it well (Figure 10). Employees understand how their base pay is 39% 61% 63% 75% On the other hand, base pay is an area that could determined Our managers execute our base pay benefit significantly from more effective execution, 38% 54% 67% 72% program well particularly when it comes to communication. Just Our base pay program supports our over half of organizations report that employees attraction and retention goals 42% 62% 67% 82% understand how their base pay is determined (57%) Our base pay program supports our long- or believe their managers execute the base pay term business goals, strategy and objectives 40% 51% 65% 76% program well (55%). As for employees, fewer than Our base pay program supports our desired half (47%) say their organization does a good job of culture 34% 54% 64% 79% explaining their base pay programs, and only four in 10 (42%) believe there is a clear link between their job performance and their pay.14
  16. 16. Incentive Compensation Figure 11. Performance-based rewards: Incentive compensation is key toGetting incentive compensation right is one of communicating organizational prioritiesthe most potent ways for organizations to align How have the followingemployee behaviors with business objectives and aspects of your organization’sreinforce the value of high performance. While short-term incentive/bonusa majority of organizations report no changes to programs changed within the Asia Latin North past 12 months? Global Pacific EMEA America Americaeligibility or targets for annual incentives, our surveyshows that more than twice as many companies Eligibilityreported increasing incentive eligibility last year as Decreased 5% 8% 3% 4% 2%those that reported decreasing it. Additionally, four Stayed the same 83% 76% 85% 82% 89%times as many companies reported an increase inincentive targets over the last year as those that Increased 13% 16% 12% 14% 9%reported decreasing them (Figure 11). Individual incentive targets Decreased 5% 6% 9% 3% 2%However, these modest increases in bonus eligibilityand opportunity are not keeping pace with increasing Stayed the same 75% 68% 74% 73% 84%expectations for organizational and individual Increased 20% 26% 17% 24% 13%performance. Nearly four in 10 survey participants(38%) reported that expectations for organizationalperformance had increased, and under one-third Figure 12. Performance-based rewards: Well-designed recognition programs(30%) said individual performance expectations reinforce desired culture, behaviors and resultshad increased. Even more organizations expect the Percentage agreeing with statementsperformance bar to be raised in the next 12 months. about performance-based recognition at their organization. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4Continually ratcheting up expectations without Employees understand how recognitioncommensurate increases in earning opportunities 47% 72% 77% 87% awards are determinedhas the potential to sap employees’ energy levels Our managers execute our recognition— and reduce productivity. Organizations have an programs well 33% 53% 61% 76%opportunity to reinforce the message that greater Our recognition programs support ourperformance is highly valued by increasing the extent 35% 57% 76% 82% attraction and retention goalsto which pay and bonus awards are differentiated on Our recognition programs support our long-the basis of employee performance. 36% 60% 77% 83% term business goals, strategy and objectivesRecognition Our recognition programs support our 54% 70% 80% 88%As with base pay, organizations are more likely desired cultureto achieve best practices in recognition if they Our organization monitors theare in the context of a highly effective EVP Group . implementation of our recognition programs 47% 69% 76% 86% to make sure they are consistent with4 organizations are more than twice as likely to program objectives and guidelinesreport that recognition programs support long-term Recognition programs at my organizationbusiness goals. They are also almost twice as have a specific role in our total rewards 41% 60% 75% 83%likely to say that recognition programs support their portfoliodesired culture. Employees in these organizationsare more likely to understand how recognitionprograms are determined, and managers are morelikely to be seen as executing these programs well(Figure 12).“Continually ratcheting up expectations without commensurate increases in earning opportunities has the potential to sap employees’ energy levels — and reduce productivity.” 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 15
  17. 17. In general, Group 4 companies execute recognition Group 4 organizations are also more likely to have a programs better than Group 1 companies do, but global job family architecture, with global job leveling these programs sometimes fall short in terms and scaled competencies to create structure for of manager execution. Just over half of survey their philosophy. respondents believe that managers implement these At these organizations, managers are more effective programs effectively. From our perspective, this is at providing career support for employees, and“Social recognition an area where added emphasis on delivery could employees are more likely to understand how they be the key to achieving the benefits that recognition programs, which have can influence their careers. Group 4 organizations programs were intended to create. emerged recently as a way are also likely to have developed effective tools Social recognition programs, which have emerged and resources for career management, and career to involve employees in recently as a way to involve employees in directly management programs that support their attraction directly recognizing each recognizing each other’s contributions, hold the and retention goals (Figure 13). other’s contributions, hold potential to expand the use and effectiveness of On the other hand, career management is one of the potential to expand recognition programs. One-quarter (26%) of our the most frustrating processes for employees. Our global survey sample is using social recognition in the use and effectiveness GWS found that many employees say they do not some form, most commonly the financially higher- of recognition programs.” understand how they can influence their careers and performing companies, one-third of which (33%) are report that managers are currently not effective at among the early adopters of social recognition. providing career management support to employees. Career Management This leaves a significant gap between where One reason that higher-scoring companies on our employees want to go and the sufficient resources EVP and TR Index are successful is that creating to get there. an effective EVP demonstrates an understanding The opportunity to advance in their careers is a key that the employment relationship is a two-way driver of employee attraction and retention. While street. These employers recognize that workers about three-quarters of organizations hold formal expect something in return for their commitment talent discussions at top levels of the organization, and investment in the organization. So it’s not far fewer hold discussions with employees at lower surprising that organizations highest on the EVP and levels. This is an area in which articulation and TR Index demonstrate the greatest distinction from differentiation of the EVP can make a significantly their Group 1 counterparts in the area of career positive difference — especially in key employee management, a top driver of attraction and retention segments — by helping employees understand the across all employee groups. opportunities available to them and how to develop Companies with highly effective EVPs are more a career with the organization. than twice as likely to have an articulated career management philosophy. As we noted above, Figure 13. Career and environmental rewards: Organizations with high EVP effectiveness have more effective career management programs To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the way career management programs are currently designed and implemented at your organization? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 We have an articulated career management philosophy 18% 30% 45% 70% Employees understand how they can influence their careers 18% 33% 48% 70% Managers are effective at providing career management support to 19% 28% 43% 61% employees Our organization has developed effective tools and resources for career 17% 25% 43% 64% management Our career management programs support our attraction and retention goals 19% 38% 54% 70% Employees at our organization are frequently able to achieve career advancement by moving across organizational boundaries, geographies, 34% 47% 55% 78% functions and business units16
  18. 18. Talent MobilityThinking about a global approach? According to the 2012 Global Talent Mobility Study by TowersWatson and workforce mobility association Worldwide ERC® over the next two to three years, ,nearly half of multinationals expect to increase traditional international assignments.Because of the many talent mobility challenges organizations face, they need to balance theirselection priorities. For example, almost seven in 10 employers (69%) cite prohibitive costsas a major challenge, while more than half mention high housing costs (55%) or cost-of-livingallowances (51%).Roughly two-thirds of companies report spending approximately two to three times the assignee’sannual salary on each traditional expatriate assignment. Adding to the complexity, our GWSreports that many employees — now more anxious about the future, security-minded andrisk-averse — may not value mobility or perceive it as a reward.Yet significantly, when selecting candidates to be transferred, business needs are consistentlycited as the most popular criteria. Multinationals may be overlooking equally important factors,such as helping employees understand what’s available to and expected of them in relatedcareer opportunities. For example, only 16% of companies consider family circumstances whenmaking selections. And yet family and personal situations, or a family’s inability to adapt to thehost country culture — cited by 57% and 21% of respondents, respectively — are often reportedas primary reasons for failed international assignments.Despite these difficulties, only 35% of organizations in our Talent Management and RewardsSurvey have developed special programs to promote international mobility. Companies with moreevolved EVPs back up their talent mobility process with effective delivery. They are over 80%more likely to identify employees who are internationally mobile and more than twice as likely todevelop special programs to promote international mobility.Organizations with highly effective EVPs are also more than twice as likely to have a talentbrokerage function (i.e., a way to leverage information from key HR data streams to matchdemand with supply and deliver best-fit candidates) — and also to require internationalexperience from employees who wish to advance into leadership positions.Effective segmentation, backed by action, also helps an organization think more broadly aboutits global talent strategy, unify its related programs and, most important, provide employees withthe career opportunities that are so critical to attraction and retention. Any organization standsto benefit from a strategy refining its talent mobility goals, an effective plan design that motivatesemployees to take international assignments and efficient execution to smooth the process.How employees in director/manager/supervisor/professional roles viewinternational assignmentsWhich of the following most closely reflectsyour willingness to relocate to advance All Under Age Age Age 50your career? employees age 30 30 – 39 40 – 49 and olderI would be willing to relocate, regardless of 19% 29% 21% 18% 15%global locationI would be willing to relocate, but only to 48% 56% 54% 45% 43%certain locationsI would not be willing to relocate 33% 15% 25% 36% 42%Source: 2012 Global Workforce Study 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 17
  19. 19. Leadership Development Processes and Tools That Support According to our GWS, leadership is the top driver Effective Execution of sustainable engagement globally. Are leadership Companies that have achieved more advanced levels development programs creating effective leaders? in the evolution of their EVP specifically emphasize Survey responses show that employers believe they execution. As a consequence, their results are are good at leadership development. A large majority stronger than any other group of organizations (76%) say their leadership development programs in our survey. Group 4 organizations have more support their attraction and retention goals. An even effectively aligned their talent management and greater percentage (85%) believe their programs reward programs with broader business goals. They support long-term business goals, strategy and have designed programs that help them achieve objectives, and 84% believe their programs support these goals, and they have employed solid delivery the desired culture. methods to make their programs work throughout The reported effectiveness of leadership programs the organization. in our current study, however, is most dramatic Getting the execution right is often the most among Group 4 companies (Figure 14), which are challenging aspect for companies. Effective about 40% more likely to monitor the effectiveness execution has a critical impact on outcomes, of these programs than Group 1 companies that are however, whether due to thorough performance operating in an unintegrated way. management execution, the overall effectiveness But while employers are convinced of their of managers, the successful implementation of effectiveness in this area, neither employees nor technology tools to support delivery of reward and leaders have such a positive outlook. For example, talent management programs, or measuring and when employees are asked whether or not they monitoring outcomes. believe senior management is doing a good job In fact, Group 4 companies are 70% to 90% more of developing future leaders, less than four in likely to be financially high performing than Group 10 (39%) indicate they are good or very good. 1 companies that have not progressed their EVP or Significantly, more than half of employees (54%) those in Group 2 that have simply articulated their at high-performing companies see their senior strategy. Successful design and execution are also leaders as good or very good at building leaders both related to the ultimate goal of sustainable for the future. engagement. The following section details the processes and tools that support effective execution. Figure 14. Career and environmental rewards: Leadership development is the top driver of sustainable engagement Our organization’s leadership development programs: Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Support attraction and retention goals 61% 66% 84% 89% Support long-term business goals, strategy and objectives 75% 93% 85% 94% Support the desired culture 75% 85% 84% 94% Are monitored to make sure they are consistent with our objectives 66% 78% 73% 93% and guidelines “Companies that have achieved more advanced levels in the evolution of their EVP specifically emphasize execution.”18
  20. 20. Performance Management Group 4 organizations understand that effectiveA few companies get it right: Some of the strongest performance management is a key supportoutcomes for companies with advanced EVPs are opportunity for career advancement — a top driverin the area of performance management. These of attraction and retention — and they design and “In our GWS research,organizations are twice as likely as those with execute programs to reflect that. managers reportedless evolved EVPs to create a high-performance they are generally What else are successful organizations doing right?culture, differentiate pay for performance — even As we discussed earlier, these organizations often unhappy, pressed forfor employees who receive the same rating — use a common job family architecture, job leveling time (particularly for theand incorporate career development into the and scaled competencies to create a unifiedperformance management process. They’re people aspects of the job) framework for performance and career managementalso 60% to 80% more likely to communicate and not feeling enabled.” — one that both employees and managers can relyexpectations for organizational performance, and to on. They also focus on process, teaching and skilllink salary increases and bonus payouts to individual building for supervisors and managers, to moreperformance (Figure 15). effectively execute their accountabilities in the areaYet only four in 10 overall survey respondents of performance management. And, rather than risk(42%) report that their organizations are effective in automating a bad process, they refine designs priorincorporating competencies into the performance to implementing a technology process — a necessary baseline for Manager Effectivenessdetermining how a job should be performed. And Companies rely heavily on managers to help themfewer than that (37%) find their organization effective execute programs and strategy; however, managerin incorporating career development into the effectiveness emerged as an issue in this year’sperformance management process. study. Earlier, we explored the current stressedMoreover, employers are facing new performance state of the work environment. No populationmanagement challenges. Managers, faced with may be feeling the pressure as acutely right nowperformance management delivery, are more as managers. In our GWS research, managerspressured for time; this can create an adverse reported they are generally unhappy, pressed forimpact on the enablement and energy components time (particularly for the people aspects of the job)of sustainable engagement. Managers complain and not feeling enabled. Perhaps as a result, theythat the process is broken, overly complicated and generally do not understand program goals and aretoo time-consuming, often because companies not executing programs effectively.automate bad processes, further compoundingthe problem.Figure 15. Performance management remains the key vehicle for linking pay to performance How effective is your organization’s performance management process in the following areas? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Communicating expectations for organizational performance 45% 56% 66% 80% Creating a high-performance culture 32% 46% 61% 78% Linking salary increases to individual performance results 46% 64% 69% 81% Linking bonus payouts to individual performance results 49% 66% 72% 79% Linking bonus payouts to organizational performance results 58% 74% 80% 85% Differentiating pay based on performance even for employees who receive 29% 42% 50% 66% the same performance rating Incorporating competencies into the performance management process 30% 37% 45% 67% Incorporating career development into the performance management 19% 35% 39% 66% process 2012 – 2013 Global Talent Management and Rewards Study 19