Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Ken Auer's avatar

So, a friend of mine was fond of saying, "What if we turn the knobs up to 10 on good practices?".

We give semi-continuous feedback on all aspects of contribution. Everyone has a mentor that may or may not be the person they are working with on a daily basis. Anytime there is conflict within a team, we encourage it to be dealt with. We also tend to have retrospectives every two weeks on most projects which is mostly about "how do we work better together?" We have one-on-one meetings between mentor and mentee every 1-3 weeks for everyone (weekly for more junior or recent members of the team, less often for those who are well established in the culture). We use checkins (15five.com) so people take a few minutes each week to reflect and report on how they are doing, what challenges they are facing, and what progress they are making on their priorities each week. Then we have general reviews to get peer feedback every 3-6 months on how people are progressing in all the areas of "expectations" and pick 1-3 things the person should focus on that won't naturally happen without some effort.

We review compensation yearly independent of all these things... but the feedback we've given and gotten throughout the year feed into it. Occasionally, when someone is clearly knocking it out of the park in their progression, and we feel they are clearly underpaid, we'll give them a mid-year bump.

We also make sure the "bag of money" is somewhat distributed on a quarterly basis with profit sharing bonuses... so more emphasis is on the contributing to the success of the company and "sharing the wealth... as long as there is wealth" than on the "what's my raise this year"... everyone gets a raise every time we have a good quarter.

That said, in addition to reviewing base compensation once/year, we tweak our bonus formulas every year based on what we've learned over the previous year(s). We also give each person a yearly offer (once we lay out the tweaks in the bonus formulas) with the option to trade off some things about their compensation (more time off vs. more money, putting more of their compensation at risk for a increased reward based on company profits). Someone who wants to take some more time off with their family can do that whether they've worked for us 1, 5, or 10 years. Someone who has a pretty good handle on their finances and is willing to share the risk and reward can do so.

So, everyone gets feedback and gives feedback. What one person wants/needs is not what the next person wants/needs.

Not perfect, but the best we've got.

Continuous Feedback Loops... it's not just for Extreme Programming any more.

Expand full comment
Klaus Wuestefeld's avatar

Take a look at a simple process called Team-Set Salaries. I created it in 2002 when I was a manager with a team of 50 agile developers and have used it ever since.

It embraces subjectivity instead of fighting it. TSS is collaborative and completely decouples this quaLitative feedback Kent is talking about from quaNTitative performance appraisals you need for compensation.

Fair salary-setting has become a non-issue in my teams.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts