I just had a very interesting lunch. We discussed the core of the central wage negotiations between the unions and the employers' counterparts - that will be encompassing more people than ever this spring.

Is it not very old fashioned to define strict wages for huge clusters of people, solely dependent on some industry category that they were tagged with?

Without any concern of the quality of the job that they perform.
Without any recognition of them as individuals with various degrees of enthusiasm and contribution to cultural aspects of the organization they belong to.
Without even thinking about the relationships they bring to company or the processes they build that can have long lasting value for their companies in many years to come.

In essence - shouldn't salaries be set related to each individual’s contribution to the value creation of their firm? I.e. to building intellectual capital.

You tell me.

Views: 557


You need to be a member of Smarter-Companies to add comments!

Comment by Peder Hofman-Bang on January 25, 2010 at 2:36pm
Gerhard - thanks for your support. I realize that it some sort of ideal picture that I am drawing. But it would be interesting to at least see some small steps in the IC incentives direction. E.g. companies that have been using scorecards for some years, should be able to correlate intangible KPI's with tangible outcomes, thus daring to pay accordingly.

It would be great to hear more about such experiences in the stories section here: http://www.icknowledgecenter.com/forum/categories/stories-1/listFor....

Finally, I guess we will have to wait for a very long time before unions start thinking intangibles; but, really, they should be the first ones to do it.

© 2022   Created by Mary Adams.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service