Incentive Eligibility Varies
by Job and Location
The economic downturn has accentuated the
need to contain compensation costs by holding down fixed, base salary
expenses. To maintain competitive pay plans, an increasing number of
companies are giving more employees across different jobs the
opportunity to earn variable, performance-driven incentives for
achieving individual and organizational goals.
This article, based on participant data from Culpepper Compensation
Surveys, provides a high-level analysis of short- and long-term
incentive eligibility for operations, technical, and life science
employees in the U.S. and Canada.
Within each job group, we provide
aggregate breakouts for the following combination of non-executive job levels:
- Director Levels
(Director and
Senior Director Levels)
-
Manager Levels
(Manager and Senior Manager Levels)
-
Advisory Levels
(Advisory and Senior Advisory
Levels)
-
Individual Contributor Levels
(Associate/Entry, Intermediate, and Senior Levels)
Impact of Job Level on Incentive
Eligibility
There is a strong relationship between job level and eligibility for
earning incentives. Moving from individual contributor up to
director levels, the opportunity to earn incentives typically
increases. However, this pattern is not always consistent.
It is not uncommon for advisory-level employees to be more likely to
earn incentives than higher level manager positions. Advisory-level
employees typically have over ten years of experience and are
considered skilled experts in their field. In critical job
functions, companies will often pay advisory level employees at
market rates close to or above manager level positions.
Eligibility for Short-Term Incentives
Short-term cash incentives include bonuses, commissions, cash
profit-sharing, and other forms of variable cash payments typically
earned within a one-year period.
Director-level
employees are about two to three times more likely than individual
contributors to be eligible for short-term incentives (Table 1).
Incentive eligibility
also varies by type of job and location. In the United States, life
science employees are more likely to have the opportunity to earn
short-term incentives than operations and technical employees. In
Canada, technology employees are more likely to have the opportunity to
earn short-term incentives than operations and life science employees.
|
Table 1: Eligibility for Short-Term Cash Incentives (STIs) |
|
Country & Job Level |
Percent of Employees Eligible for STIs |
|
Operations Employees |
Technical Employees |
Life Science Employees |
|
United States |
|
|
|
|
Director Levels |
79% |
79% |
82% |
|
Manager Levels |
56% |
57% |
66% |
|
Advisory Levels |
61% |
40% |
67% |
|
Individual Contributor Levels |
37% |
36% |
43% |
|
Canada |
|
|
|
|
Director Levels |
65% |
82% |
75% |
|
Manager Levels |
22% |
61% |
45% |
|
Advisory Levels |
45% |
59% |
34% |
|
Individual Contributor Levels |
21% |
49% |
39% |
Eligibility for Long-Term Incentives
Long-term incentives include stock options, restricted stock
shares/units, performance stock shares/units, phantom stock shares,
stock appreciation rights, and other incentives typically earned over
periods longer than one year.
Overall, significantly fewer employees are
eligible for long-term incentives than short-term incentives.
Broad-based long-term incentive programs have fallen out of favor in
recent years. Expensing requirements, declines in stock prices, and
volatility in the stock market have led many companies to limit
long-term incentives to executives and director level employees. In lieu
of awarding long-term incentives to non-management employees, many
companies have reported shifting towards a greater use of
performance-based short-term cash incentives.
Director level employees are two to six times more likely to be eligible
for long-term incentives than individual contributors (Table 2).
In the United States, director level life science employees are more
likely to be eligible for short-term incentives than operations and
technical employees. However, at lower job levels, technical and
operations employees are more likely than life science employees to have
the opportunity to be awarded long-term incentives.
In Canada, director level technical and operations employees are more
likely to be eligible for short-term incentives than life science
employees. At lower job levels, technical employees are more likely than
operations and life science employees to have the opportunity to be
awarded long-term incentives.
|
Table 2: Eligibility for Long-Term Incentives (LTIs) |
|
Country & Job Level |
Percent of Employees Eligible for LTIs |
|
Operations Employees |
Technical Employees |
Life Science Employees |
|
United States |
|
|
|
|
Director Levels |
46% |
49% |
59% |
|
Manager Levels |
23% |
34% |
30% |
|
Advisory Levels |
37% |
35% |
28% |
|
Individual Contributor Levels |
13% |
18% |
9% |
|
Canada |
|
|
|
|
Director Levels |
64% |
62% |
49% |
|
Manager Levels |
14% |
44% |
27% |
|
Advisory Levels |
29% |
54% |
16% |
|
Individual Contributor Levels |
10% |
29% |
9% |
Correlation between STI and LTI
Eligibility
There is strong correlation between short- and long-term incentive
eligibility. Employees eligible for long-term incentives are much
more likely to be eligible for short-term incentives than employees
not eligible for short-term incentives. With the exception of
pre-revenue start-ups and companies with limited access to capital,
most companies that award long-term incentives to employees also
provide opportunities to earn short-term incentives.
Differences between Job Specialties
Incentive eligibility can also vary significantly between specific types
of jobs in similar departments or job functions. For example, within
accounting and finance, Sarbanes-Oxley auditors are more likely to
receive incentives than general accountants. In information systems,
Oracle database administrators are more likely to be eligible for
incentives than other types of database administrators.
Differences between Countries
The data in this article is limited to the United States and Canada.
However, it’s worth noting that if you examine other countries,
significant differences emerge in both short- and long-term incentive
eligibility. Multi-national corporations should carefully consider a
variety of factors when designing compensation plans, including the use
of cash allowances, impact of tax code on pay, and cultural differences
between countries.
Differences between countries and job specialties underlines the
importance of using job-specific data when determining incentive
eligibility.
W. Leigh
Culpepper, CCP, GRP, CBP
Additional Options for Viewing Data by
Job Level
Participants in Culpepper Compensation Surveys can view
compensation data by a wide range of
job levels and job-level combinations from entry-level associates to senior directors, allowing you
to accurately match more of your jobs.
Incentive Eligibility for Individual Jobs
Participants in Culpepper Compensation Surveys can view
detailed compensation data for
over 700
job families, covering every area, function and level of IT,
technology, and life science organizations.
Additional Data Cuts and Metrics
Participants in
Culpepper Compensation Survey subscribers can segment data
by country, geographic location, industry sector, and company
size. Subscribers can also
customize reports by selecting preferences for allowance
eligibility, overtime eligibility, data aging, components of compensation, and statistical
metrics.
|
|