sometimes need to increase production of certain models, so we have a
variable weight curve, which means the weight can be adjusted up or
down depending on the specific demand at anytime.”
“This is where we had to get crafty: we then take the total weighted
number of units produced and we have a tiered efficiency metric,” the
plant manager said, clearly proud of the complex system they had
developed. She explained in intricate detail how the variable tier system
worked, stratified based on the number of people that made bonus in
each tier every month.
“That way, a certain level of competitiveness is inspired and we
prevent ourselves from paying out too many bonuses, which we feel
would decrease their impact,” concluded the plant manager.
But it didn’t end there. She went into greater detail on how the
efficiency metric was then compared to the employee’s previous six-
month tiered breakout and how an employee who maintained the top 25
percent stratification could receive an additional percentage on their
bonus.
On top of that, they factored in the quality of the product. The chief
engineer and the plant manager outlined a list of common faults,
breaking these out as either “hold faults,” which could be corrected, or
“fatal faults,” which rendered a unit unusable. For each fault and type of
fault registered, a graduated weight system multiplied by a certain factor
reduced an employee’s potential bonus. A similar multiple added to the
bonus for employees who had no registered faults in the units they
produced. While the senior management expressed pride in the bonus
system they had created, it was staggeringly complex.
I was quiet for a few moments. Then, I asked, “That’s it?”
“Well,” answered the plant manager, “there are several other little
jeff_l
(Jeff_L)
#1