[Closed] Why have bonuses?

Personally I disagree with that.

Then you're wrong.

Go ask a psychologist.

Much like John Lewis, the level of bonus paid is according to the position and salary of each member of staff.

Nothing like John Lewis.

Why do you think I went to the trouble of explicitly stating that "John Lewis, [b]when everyone in the company gets an equal share of the bonus pot[/b]"?

You really are an utter ****.

(Yes I except my banning - I spend far too much time on here anyway).

Then [i]you're wrong[/i] you have a different opinion to me.

FTFY.

This thread would really go a lot better if everyone would stop trying to deal in absolutes. The question isn't whether bonuses do or don't motivate people; it's whether, on balance, they are an efficient motivator. Most evidence seems to say not, in most cases but saying "They are not a motivator" is daft, because different people respond in different ways.

boarding bob - so you are not giving of your best unless you have a sack of money waved infront of you? Idle slacker!

They don't get an equal share. That's the point. They get a percentage. The bonus pool is not done in such a way that every member of staff/partner has the same amount of money in their bonus. See?

An equal share would see the till staff get the same amount as the CEO. That doesn't happen. Nor does it happen at Goldman Sachs.

So are the bonuses at GS paid out in exactly the same way as at JL (in direct proportion to their basic salary)?

And what % of their salaries do the partners at Goldman Sachs get?

And what % do regular employees get?

Finally, every partner [ at john lewis] receives an Annual Bonus, which is a share of the profit. It is calculated as a percentage of the salary, with the same percentage for everyone, from top management down to the shop floor and the storage rooms.

Yuu are a banker and I claim our £500 billion

I said: Stupid to reward not bad behaviour, but it worked
you said: so not stupid then as it worked

some idiom about prevention and cure

There were a lot of doughnuts at Goldmans this year, not among the partners.

Anyone read The Art of Captaincy by Mike Brearley?

Funnily enough different people are motivated by different things. So how many more pages do we need to prove this obvious fact?

Northwind +1

Also, I think there's the aspect of direction/focus as well as level of effort which I think incentives can strengthen. It's possible to have two extremely motivated colleagues, putting in equal levels of effort. However one is putting their efforts into less value-added activities. I've experienced bonus systems which address this, and which in effect replacing some supervision / line management resource, and hence being beneficial. When I've been on the receiving end of this, I appreciated the 'breathing space' that I had (no manager over my shoulder all the time), and the KPI & incentive system gave me clarity of objectives, and a sense of progress / job satisfaction that far outweighed the modest bonuses.

Why have bonuses?

different people are motivated by different things

Are we done?

There were a lot of doughnuts or zero bonuses at Goldmans this year - not among the partners. Frankly I don't know how they can justify to shareholders the level still paid out as profits plummeted.