FairSetup Helps Grow Companies

Scenario: a consulting shop with 30 people.  The consulting shop charges by the hour.  Everyone is paid hourly or in salary.  Management wants to grow the company.  Employees like what they do and, at the end of the day, growth won’t benefit them because the company charges the same amount per hour per person irrespective of whether it is a 30 person company or a 300 person company.  How can you get the company to grow?

What we’ve recently realized with one of our clients is that FairSetup creates an opportunity for a team to participate in growth of the business.  For example,

Continue reading

NYT: They Work Long Hours, but What About Results?

Our summary: generally spending time is mistaken for efficiency.  Cut down on meetings, focus on metrics, expectations, and outcomes.  You shouldn’t need to stay late or work on weekends to be efficient.  The last part of the article has a significant overlap with setting up expectations on when using the FairSetup model.


They Work Long Hours, but What About Results?
Published: October 6, 2012

IT’S 5 p.m. at the office. Working fast, you’ve finished your tasks for the day and want to go home. But none of your colleagues have left yet, so you stay another hour or two, surfing the Web and reading your e-mails again, so you don’t come off as a slacker.

It’s an unfortunate reality that efficiency often goes unrewarded in the workplace. I had that feeling a lot when I was a partner in a Washington law firm. Because of my expertise, I could often answer a client’s questions quickly, saving both of us time. But because my firm billed by the hour, as most law firms do, my efficiency worked against me. Continue reading

TLNT: Being The Boss: Why is Becoming a Manager So Difficult?

Our Summary: most managers remain mediocre, because they fail to recognize the difference between managing others and managing themselves.  Such managers slip into comfortable coasting after making the initial transition into a management role and fail to grow into good managers.

FairSetup thoughts: we’ve noticed that FairSetup creates a very significant pressure on managers to evolve as they themselves become part of the evaluation cycle and are receive constant feedback from their reports.  The pressure from one’s boss can be mitigated with careful political maneuvering, but one’s reports generally have a much deeper understanding of whether the business unit is moving in the right direction and whether the manager is doing his or her part in the system. Continue reading

Bloomberg: IPO-Bound Workday Said To Win Contract For Google’s HR Systems

Our Summary: Following up on our last post, Workday reportedly plans a huge deal with Google.

IPO-Bound Workday Said To Win Contract For Google’s HR Systems

By Aaron Ricadela and Brian Womack – Aug 31, 2012 12:01 AM ET

Workday Inc., the business-software maker planning an initial public offering, has signed up a big customer in Google Inc. (GOOG) for its online tools to manage employee operations, two people familiar with the deal said. Continue reading

FairSetup, an Alternative to Stacked Ranking – Forbes, TechCrunch, Vanity Fair on Downfall of Microsoft

Pardon my language, but forced ranking sucks.  It’s a terrible terrible idea and whoever came up with it, unless this was a lesser evil, should have a red cone of shame deposited on his or her head.  In a recent story on TechCrunch “Stacked Ranking“, Steve Gillmor stated:

Stack ranking, it turns out, is a cancer eating away at Microsoft’s ability to save itself.

And that article, along with a Forbes article The Terrible Management Technique that Cost Microsoft Its Creativity, was responding to a piece in Vanity Fair called Microsoft’s Lost Decade.  Here is a chilling quote from the article:

Every current and former Microsoft employee I interviewed—every one—cited stack ranking as the most destructive process inside of Microsoft, something that drove out untold numbers of employees. The system—also referred to as “the performance model,” “the bell curve,” or just “the employee review”—has, with certain variations over the years, worked like this: every unit was forced to declare a certain percentage of employees as top performers, then good performers, then average, then below average, then poor.

Continue reading