Pay by time or Pay by task?
I was having a Slack discussion recently with some of my friends at Bloch&Østergaard (Working to create workplaces where people want to show up).
We started discussing the article about Microsoft testing a 4-day work week which has also been posted in the forum here.
The discussion then transitioned into why we are paying people for their time in the office and not their effort.
For many years – a couple of hundred – we have rewarded employees according to effort=time=money.
Will it make more sense in the future to remove the "time" factor in this equation? Maybe it should be something more like tasks/roles/responsibility = money.
This is partially what we see with the growth of the gig economy. Companies pay to get something done - not necessarily for the hours worked.
So the discussion for the forum is two-fold.
1) Are there any examples out there of companies that are moving away from pay-by-time and towards pay-by-"something else"? And doing it internally - not by just hiring gig workers.
2) In general a discussion on how "pay-by-"something else" potentially could work.
Looking forward to hearing input!
Be the first rebel to reply.
Today marks an important day in Corporate Rebels’ vaunted history: We're embarking on a new adventure to radically shake up the world of work. How? We're launching a new company together with some of the most inspiring workplace pioneers in the world.
How are work outcomes affected by the treatment of those who do it? I have been exploring this question for ~50 years. In that time, one comment stuck with me more than any other. It was made in 1998 when I interviewed a group of men in Indianapolis who had redesigned most of the US city’s waste collection and disposal operations. “We are no longer expected to park our brains at the door when we come to work.”