Performance-based pay may lead to problems including fines — and even a tarnished brand

Nobel prize winners studied performance-based compensation practices reported back a cautionary tale.
OCT 23, 2016
Paying staff based on how well they perform makes a lot of sense. Or does it? Two professors who won the Nobel Prize for Economic Sciences earlier this month studied performance-based compensation practices — and reported back a cautionary tale. Yes, incentives can motivate the right employees, but depending how metrics are designed and calculated, they can encourage disastrous behavior — and the firm will ultimately pay big, sometimes with fines, other times with a tarnished brand. Think Wells Fargo, where thousands of employees opened fake customer accounts to boost their own sales numbers and rake in higher bonuses — the costs and headaches to clients be damned. The extent of the damage to Wells Fargo is inestimable at this point, but it's safe to say it'll be huge and reverberate to other areas of its business. Think Morgan Stanley, which was charged in Massachusetts with conducting an unethical sales contest in which financial advisers were incentivized to get clients to take loans against their investment accounts. Even pay based on performance outside of sales targets can prove troublesome. As InvestmentNews reporter Liz Skinner found in her story on the Nobel winners' work and how it relates to advisers, compensation tied to performance can deter managers from giving bad reviews — even when deserved. As Philip Palaveev, CEO of The Ensemble Practice, noted that in these instances the firms' costs rise because employees are paid at a level above what is justified relative to the productivity of coworkers. He also said it could inspire the fudging of data to shift, for example, the onboarding of clients into a quarter that fits the adviser versus reality. (More: How to calculate a fair salary for a new hire) “In the absence of proper management and a good culture, performance-based compensation can fail miserably,” Mr. Palaveev said. The lesson seems to be that performance is subjective, and it needs to be gauged in that light. Tying pay or bonuses squarely to figures that can be manipulated is a sure route to trickery that will not deliver a positive return on investment to a firm.

Latest News

As Trump Accounts prep for July 4 launch, Franklin Templeton plans $1,000 match
As Trump Accounts prep for July 4 launch, Franklin Templeton plans $1,000 match

“We are helping families take an important first step toward building a financial foundation for the next generation,” said Franklin Templeton CEO Jenny Johnson

Savant Wealth Management enters Maine with latest acquisition
Savant Wealth Management enters Maine with latest acquisition

Richard Brothers Financial Advisors joins the fee-only RIA, adding its first Maine office and $240 million in client assets

Clearstead adds $5.3B Philadelphia wealth team from myCIO
Clearstead adds $5.3B Philadelphia wealth team from myCIO

Cleveland RIA grows to $68 billion in assets as Philadelphia team, deepening its high-net-worth and retirement-plan practice.

Advisors still have questions on Trump Accounts ahead of July 4 launch
Advisors still have questions on Trump Accounts ahead of July 4 launch

Financial planning leaders say unresolved rules on fees, Roth conversions and financial aid complicate comparisons with 529 plans.

Trust at Scale: How AI Personalization Rewires Business for Growth
Trust at Scale: How AI Personalization Rewires Business for Growth

AI can personalize at scale, but without trust, it falls flat.

SPONSORED Who builds the income when the pension disappears?

Dan Biagini of American Equity says the steady decline of pensions, longer lifespans and a reset in interest rates are rewriting how advisors build retirement income

SPONSORED Why direct indexing stopped being optional

Direct indexing is on pace to outgrow ETFs and mutual funds. Northern Trust's Ken Lassner explains why the advisors who get it wish they had started sooner.