The Challenge of Messaging Financial Wellness
One of the areas of confusion I often see crop up in total rewards is around who the “customer” is for our programs. For example: if a member of an organization is unsatisfied with some aspect of their rewards, does that mean the reward program needs improvement? It’s not hard to see why this is confusing, as it’s a complex topic.
First off, the answer to the question above (as I see it) is “not necessarily”. The reason why is that it’s not just employees who are the customer, but also the organization. “The organization” includes a lot of stakeholders, encompassing other employees (including future ones), the company’s owners, and many others, depending on where you fall regarding the topic of stakeholder capitalism. This is especially true when it comes to pay programs, and incentive pay most of all. Note: assuming a pay for performance philosophy here. For example, low incentive payouts for low performance (which current participants aren’t going to be happy about) are a feature, not a bug.
A corollary of this is that it can make for an odd integration of compensation programs into employee-facing total rewards offerings, which seek to bundle all components of what an organization provides to its people into a single coherent message. Since many other programs such as benefits or learning don't tend to vary as much based on performance, it’s relatively straightforward to message these to employees in a way that resonates with their needs and desires. The fact that there are so many messages embedded in compensation programs can make lumping those in more difficult. However, with an increased focus on financial wellness, this communication challenge becomes an increasingly acute pain point.
All of that being said, what PayPal is doing in this space seems like a pretty solid approach to me. Both in terms of the programs themselves and messaging about them as a comprehensive program. Namely:
- Lowering costs for healthcare programs
- Making all employers shareholders. Common in tech, but not as common in other industries. I’m a big proponent of the practice, more on this here.
- Establishing a generous pay floor. Most tech companies tend to pay well above minimum wage, but it’s still a worthy practice.
- Financial wellness guidance for all employees
Their “Net Disposable Income” stat is also an interesting way to track progress, albeit one that requires some investment to define consistently for an organization with a global footprint.
Good food for thought!
VP, People Experience & Total Rewards @ Twitch
3 年This is terrific, T, and a great rundown of the cool work PayPal is doing. I know you tend to focus more on the compensation part of the EVP, but I think this is arguably even more critical for the benefits side of the house. One of the hardest things to articulate is the concept of tradeoffs, and how as an organization we balance all the constraints, our values, our business and financial goals, our talent strategy, and more to determine where we'll lead, where we'll be competitive, and where we won't play. Obviously not directly helpful if you're an individual with a specific unmet need, but the more organizations can share about their values and how they make tradeoffs, the better. It's too easy in a vacuum to assume ill intent or lack of thoughtfulness. Providing a framework and, ideally, some feedback mechanism for employees to voice what's important to them, leads to more trust and less unrest or dissatisfaction.