Too good to be true
The Leveraged Compensation Plan was introduced to Mass Markets in the 4th quarter of 1995. The plan sounded too good to be true.
Customer Service Representatives were given promises of huge commission checks. According to management, the plan was flawless. The primary concerns by employees at the time were objectives and ethics. We wondered if the objectives would be set fairly, if the rules would be enforced equally, and if people would cheat.
Many, many questions were asked of management concerning the objectives. Their response was as expected: The company will set reasonable objectives. Period.
The issue of ethics was also a major concern. Now that our paychecks would be affected directly by the actions of our co-workers, what assurances would management give us that the company would enforce sales and ethics guidelines? The response from management was something like, "they break a rule once, they're warned two times, they're out of here." This was great news, since many of us had witnessed zero action by management in the integrity department.
The years from 1996 through the present, however, have proved their predictions false.
Cheating to survive
I waited until August 1996 to join the Leveraged Compensation Plan. In September 1996 I received my first payout check. For the next 2-1/2 years I rode the Leveraged Compensation roller coaster. One month the objective would be attainable, the next month impossible. And management always shook their heads and blamed it on "upper management" or "the idiots in Denver."
Bottom line, we had nothing to do but chant the serenity prayer, bite our lip, or practice whatever stress reducing activity worked for us. Some had a different way to deal with the stress.
For many of my co-workers, the way to meet and exceed (usually) the objective was to simply cheat. Management had nothing but complete apathy for those who stole sales, put in fraudulent service, or slammed the customers. I know of no sales consultants who were fired for unethical sales behavior during those 2-1/2 years. Although there were plenty of consultants terminated, the reasons were never for cheating, slamming, stealing orders, or putting service in fraudulently.
I'm against firing people for mistakes, we all make them. But I am not exaggerating when I say the behavior was encouraged. At the very least these people needed to stop being rewarded. Attaining the company's unreasonably high objectives was all the more difficult when the people who stole my sales, or slammed customers, or cheated, were rewarded.
And they still are.
Many of the people who cared about the ethics left the department, or quit their jobs.
Wolves watch the hen house
In 1996 the average TOE (seniority) date in the office was probably 10-15 years. Today it is something like 9 months. The reason for the abnormally high turnover was in part due to management's apathy. It is demoralizing to see the cheaters rewarded for their high sales, while the procedures put in place to stop this behavior were seldom, if ever enforced.
When someone stole my sales, and this happened on average 1 out of every 10 orders, it affected my paycheck! And it hurts the company and the customer when fraudulent service orders and slamming occur. If I had the time to police every order (and I didn't), then management would allocate the sale back to me. This was their solution. Nothing was done about the offender. I know this because I worked in the office for 3 years and the same names always came up.
There's a reason why nothing was done.
If a Sales Consultant brings in significant revenue, then they aren't the only one who reaps the reward. Their manager's payout is based on how much revenue is brought in by his/her team. When valid concerns were brought to the managers in the Center for Customer Service, nothing was done.
I don't think it makes good sense to have the wolf watch the hen house, but management seems to think it's a dandy idea. That's because no matter what, the way the compensation plan is set up the greatest rewards will always funnel up to the least deserving people. That's because managers get even larger payouts than those actually making the sale, doing the work, and/or completing the widgets.
Actions speak louder than any words, and management's rhetoric concerning ethics became a joke in the Center for Customer Service. And all of us, including the company, continue to lose money either from our paychecks, bad debt, or lost customers when backs are turned on this behavior.
Screeners and technicians
For screeners and network technicians, the barometer used for measuring your contribution won't be sales revenue; it will be tickets or work orders completed, probably. It doesn't matter. The reward will be based on the amount of widgets you complete. Your reward will be a paycheck.
Your manager's reward will be a paycheck based on how many widgets are completed by his/her work group. If Network's managers are anything like Mass Market's, expect them to ignore those who only do the easy work, or complete work and trouble tickets that, in reality, aren't completed. Greed blinds idiots.
After the strike last summer (1998), I decided to take another course of action. Having spent the previous 2 years battling with management to make the workplace fair, I went to Security in December, 1998, with a large stack of sales code violations. They suggested I visit with my 2nd level manager with these concerns.
I brought the stack of violations, along with a 4 page memo I spent many, many hours planning, to the table. I asked this Team Leader to review the folders and take action. I also asked for a written response.
By February, 1999, exactly 2 months later, however, I had not hear squat from this Team Leader. I was hoping for at least an obligatory response. This manager's failure to respond illustrates the level of apathy present. Remember, managers are compensated from the 1st level to the Director to the President and CEO. These are the people who are supposed to enforce code of conduct violations.
Enforcing fairness
A neutral third party has been needed all along to enforce the ethics. This would create a fair playing field.
I've escalated my complaint and it's currently being reviewed by another department. I've left Mass Markets, partially due to the apathy and ethics roadblocks I faced during my years as a Sales Consultant. Also, I didn't enjoy being a policeman. But remember, this was my paycheck we're talking about. Now it's your paycheck we're talking about.
If you care about your job, and plan to stay there, you will probably be spending a lot more time at it than you already are. Management has been unable to make the Leveraged Compensation Plan fair and equitable so you will most likely be spending your time helping them do that.
Or you'll leave the place...like over 90% have in the Center for Customer Service these last 3 years.
Fasten your seatbelts...it's gonna be a bumpy ride!
| 