Yahoo! Inc.’s Marissa Mayer was the country’s highest-paid female CEO. The 39-year-old was awarded $59.1 million in 2014, making her No. 3 among the eight women on the Bloomberg Pay Index…
The problem is, as As Wally Bock succinctly said last year, “We live in a world of microwavable answers and quick fixes” — and bosses see stars as quick fixes,” and Yahoo’s board thought Mayer the star would quickly fix Yahoo.
But in a world where where people want star status in order to brand themselves, boards and bosses would do well to remember that they don’t come with any kind of money-back guarantee — in fact, they more often come with some kind of golden buyout.
Most star performers are a product of the ecosystem in which they perform. Change the management, culture, especially culture, or any other part of that ecosystem and stars may fall.
And never forget that that ecosystem is permeated by that insidious little detail that impacts success and is so often ignored in discussions — the economy.
As everyone knows, Yahoo isn’t Google, so…
A rising star at Google has become a falling star at Yahoo.
And a lesson learned for thinking bosses at any level, especially those responsible for hiring executive and strategic talent — the past is no guarantee of the future.
Do you remember last August when news that Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments, was raising the the minimum wage at his company to $70,000, phased in over the next three years, and all hell broke loose?
Reality-show offers, book deals, research requests from Harvard, both complimentary and scathing media attention; and, hilariously, Rush Limbaugh calling a socialist.
He partly funded the move by cutting his own salary from $1.1 million to $70K.
So what happened?
So far, the results are positive.
…the publicity he’s gotten would boost new customer inquiries from 30 per month to 2,000 within two weeks. (…) customer retention rate rose from 91 to 95 percent in the second quarter. Only two employees quit — a nonevent.
The short reason Price did what he did was because he realized he wasn’t living the values he was raised with and in which he believed.
Obviously, it’s more complicated than that, so read the article.
Then think, really think, about how you can translate your values and beliefs into tangible actions, as opposed to empty words.
Gallup regularly polls workers around the world to find out. Its survey last year found that almost 90 percent of workers were either “not engaged” with or “actively disengaged” from their jobs. Think about that: Nine out of 10 workers spend half their waking lives doing things they don’t really want to do in places they don’t particularly want to be.
Pretty sad, but what happened to bring us to this sorry state?
Not what, but who.
Disengagement was born in 1776 with Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations, became the father of industrial capitalism, and gave birth to the belief that “people were naturally lazy and would work only for pay.”
When money is made the measure of all things, it becomes the measure of all things.
To be sure, people should be adequately compensated for their work. (…) But in securing such victories for working people, we should not lose sight of the aspiration to make work the kind of activity people embrace, rather than the kind of activity they shun.
For decades, study after study and survey after survey have placed money (assuming a living wage) around number five on what’s important to workers.
How can we do this? By giving employees more of a say in how they do their jobs. By making sure we offer them opportunities to learn and grow. And by encouraging them to suggest improvements to the work process and listening to what they say.
Work that is adequately compensated is an important social good. But so is work that is worth doing. Half of our waking lives is a terrible thing to waste.
Autonomy. Challenge. Learning and growth. The chance to make a difference. Compensation.
In bygone days the ‘my father can beat up your father’ was a favorite taunt.
These days it’s more often ‘my father earns more than your mother’.
So goes the gender pay gap and has since women entered the workforce.
Much has been written and many hands have been wrung over the disparity of pay between men and women doing the same job.
But the bias isn’t always intentional.
A vast majority of them are fair-minded guys who want women to succeed. They’re absolutely certain that they don’t have a gender problem themselves; it must be some other guys who do. Yet they’re leaders of companies that pay men more than women for the same jobs.
Now an intriguing idea has surfaced playing off the SEC’s new rule forcing companies to publish comparisons of how much chief executive officers take home compared with ordinary employees
The idea is to do the same between males/females within each company.
This would be especially interesting in tech, which admits that diversity may be a great goal, but won’t happen any time soon, even in companies which have made it a priority, such as Apple.
In the event the idea gains any traction you can assume enterprise will fight it as passionately — probably more — as it fought the CEO comparison, which took five years to become reality.
Without the force of law, how likely that the comparison could become a reality?
There are two ways that come to mind.
The first is to have a company step forward and offer the information voluntarily.
The second is that an internal whistleblower will publish the information anonymously on social media.
The second is far more likely, especially in the data-driven world in which today’s companies must operate.
Henry Ford figured it out in 1914 when he doubled his workers’ daily wage. He did so on the assumption that they would spend the additional money on stuff beyond subsistence needs and he was right — they bought Fords.
Companies today still haven’t learned that lesson and continue to treat workers as disposable, fighting the idea of a living wage and crying that the cost will destroy them.
According to an SEC document filed Tuesday, nearly 47% of the total shareholders voted against Salesforce’s executive compensation packages at its annual shareholders meeting…
Maybe, just maybe, corporate America has finally gone too far and we’re ready to fight back.
I’m not a lover of the so-called 1099 economy, primarily because I think the concept and the unicorns it’s spawned have been successful at gaming the system — so far.
Managed by Q provides on-demand cleaning services for offices using an iPad, which it installs for free, and also offers other services like restocking the fridge or office supplies. With on-demand and subscription services for customers — and now 150 cleaners in New York — its services have become pretty popular: They’re used by other startups like Flatiron Health, Elite Daily, and Uber.
Managed by Q hires its “operators,” as it calls them, as employees, offering full-time and part-time employment with benefits and stock options. The work is flexible, and Managed by Q works with operators’ schedules.
I find it ironic that Uber, poster child of the 1099 model, hires a company that proves you can make money and still do traditional hiring, treat all employees well, draw investment and make money.
I’ve said it before and will continue saying it because it’s true, a company is like a three legged stool with investors, customers and employees being the legs. If one leg is longer or more robust than another the stool will tip over.
Managed by Q is part of the minority of on-demand services that is paying attention not just to its clients, but to the people carrying out its day-to-day work. And that’s what sets it apart.
Sets it apart, gives people a future, isn’t looking at lawsuits and seems to have missed the startup greed train.
All I can say is read the article and three cheers for Q, the anti-1099 heroes.
What exactly do people mean when they say they want to be paid fairly?
Generally speaking, people define “fair” relative to themselves and those around them.
Developers working in a small company don’t compare their salaries to the developers at Google or even to their bosses.
The comparison they do typically has two steps.
First, they compare themselves to their peers, i.e., similar job, background, title, company, industry and location.
Second, they compare their salary with the salaries of those they see as peers.
The comparison is possible because, no matter what company policy says, compensation is never really secret.
As long as salary differences are based on factual points, as opposed to charm, politics, or managerial whim, people will believe they’re being treated fairly.
As has been pointed out in every media outlet on the planet, Uber is arrogant, pugnacious, obnoxious and plays fast and loose on matters from privacy to government regulations to customer charges to “contractor” relations and compensation.
Uber, in the person of CEO Travis Kalanick, has so enraged various officials that the company has been kicked out of cities, domestic and foreign, and entire countries.
Even Matt Kochman, Uber’s founding general manager in New York, left in disgust.
“Discounting the rules and regulations as a whole, just because you want to launch a product and you have a certain vision for things, that’s just irresponsible.”
Kalanick pushed, denied problems and claimed that everything that disagreed with Uber’s plans was anti-progressive or nit-picking.
In January, Mr. Kalanick delivered a speech in Munich filled with talk about compromising with regulators he once sparred with, wanting to “make 2015 the year where we establish partnerships with new European cities.”
A couple of weeks ago I wrote of clouds on the horizon in the form of a class-action lawsuit from 2009 that could affect not only Uber, but every business based on so-called contractors.
Turns out they weren’t clouds, but a full-fledged storm.
The Boston law firm representing Uber and Lyft drivers, Lichten & Liss-Riordan, won a 2009 decision that Massachusetts exotic dancers were employees because the club could set their shifts, and fire them. Judges in New York and Nevada followed that reasoning last year.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the California courts.
If the drivers win, it will be even more interesting to see how all the startups based on the 1099 business model play when the field is level.
I said yesterday I’d provide a simple way to get back in sync with your people.
It’s not rocket science and certainly not new.
In fact, I’ve been telling managers for decades that if they want to know what someone thinks or wants to ask, instead of assuming or “figuring it out.”
Aflac chief Amos admits his solution sounds obvious: If you want to know what would keep someone from quitting, ask. “It sounds like common sense, but not many companies really do it.”
I’ve also been saying that money is around five on most people’s list; making a difference, recognition, challenge and opportunities to learn and grow come first.
Employers often assume, Amos says, that everyone will just want more money. But most people’s wish lists are more complicated — and more realistic — than that. Amos started polling Aflac’s employees when he became CEO in 1990. The top requests: More recognition for their work and day care for their kids.
Many companies survey their people.
The difference is that Amos acts on the results of the survey—both requests were implemented — not just in the home office, but across the country (read the article).
Amos says that “the survey rules” and the proof is found in ease of recruiting and turnover numbers.
That willingness to listen has helped Aflac — the only insurance company to show up in Fortune’s Best Companies ranking for 13 years running — to successfully recruit talented women from all over the U.S. and from as far away as India.
It also, apparently, builds loyalty: Aflac’s annual employee turnover is pretty close to zero.
Entrepreneurs face difficulties that are hard for most people to imagine, let alone understand. You can find anonymous help and connections that do understand at 7 cups of tea.
Crises never end.
$10 really does make a difference and you’ll never miss it,
Gallup regularly polls workers around the world to find out. Its survey last year found that almost 90 percent of workers were either “not engaged” with or “actively disengaged” from their jobs. Think about that: Nine out of 10 workers spend half their waking lives doing things they don’t really want to do in places they don’t particularly want to be.
Henry Ford figured it out in 1914 when he doubled his workers’ daily wage. He did so on the assumption that they would spend the additional money on stuff beyond subsistence needs and he was right — they bought Fords.
First it was Uber drivers, members of the so-called 1099 economy, who 
