pay & compensation

if you don’t eat what you kill, what do you eat?

credit: telberg photo

clearing up confusion over partner compensation in the one-firm concept. bonus: the four phases of goal-setting.

by bill reeb

we are picking up this column with the goal-setting process. after we have this discussion we can move to the next phase, which is reviewing how we would evaluate the actual performance outlined below, and how that performance assessment would impact pay, assuming the firm was on budget, over budget, or under budget.

more: 3 ways to emphasize the one-firm concept | 8 steps for a successful change process | building competency on every level | change happens: how to master it.
goprocpa.comexclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.

accountability for partners

for partners, accountability is best described as having a system in place that rewards partners for following processes and procedures, living up to their roles and responsibilities, and implementing the firm’s strategy. and on the other side, it provides sanctions when partners don’t do the above.

rewards usually take the form of public praise, financial stimulus (incentive pay) and promotions (from non-equity to equity partner, being appointed to coveted committee assignments, etc.). sanctions can include private reprimands, reductions in pay and greater reductions in pay, and can end in job demotion or termination.

the goal of accountability simply is to motivate everyone in an organization to work toward the goals and objectives established by the organization. the hope is to be able to use positive reinforcement to reward those acting in accordance with and exceeding expectations. however, experience dictates that it is equally important, even if only as a deterrent, to clearly identify sanctions for the lack of compliance or marginal performance.  these sanctions often take the form of income losses or reductions.

in our way of thinking, accountability has to be firmly entrenched in ideas and ideals such as:

  • each partner should know exactly what he or she is accountable to perform.
  • whenever practical, each partner’s accomplishments or progress should have some form of an objective component attached to help measure or monitor the results.
  • partners should be able to assess easily whether they are meeting or exceeding expectations.
  • expectations should remain constant and not shift to fit performance. there are circumstances when performance expectations can shift, but these drivers should be out of the control of the person being measured (major economic shift during the assessment period, major health issues, etc.), not just because management wants to avoid an uncomfortable discussion, an unhappy partner or the stressful role of administering whatever sanction a partner earns.
  • it is up to the individual partner, not the managing partner, to ensure that the proper levels of output are achieved.
  • it is up to the managing partner to monitor performance, report to that partner (and at some point to the board) on perceived levels of accomplishment, offer resources to provide assistance and enforce the agreement and goals. if a partner won’t perform, it is also up to the managing partner to take action, commensurate with the partner’s level of performance (or lack thereof in this case) with reprimands at one end of the scale, financial sanctions in the middle, and termination on the other extreme.
  • while personal growth goals can be customized to stretch each individual’s developmental expectations, performance measures should be set at a level such that, in a normal year with a reasonable effort, they all will be met and exceeded. therefore, by definition, performance goals should be established in a way that allows very good or exceptional effort to be classified and rewarded as over-achievement.
  • consistently achieving less than the organization’s minimum level of performance should mean that a partner won’t get to keep his or her job at some point. this is a good sanity check for performance expectations. just ask yourself this question when putting together a partner’s annual goals: “if the partner i am assessing falls short of these expectations regularly, would i be comfortable asking the board of partners (directors) to demote or fire this partner?” if the answer is “yes,” then we believe you are approaching this correctly. if the answer requires a longer response such as, “no, while the partner should do better, consistently falling short would never bring about that level of action,” then maybe you are setting your expectations too high. that is why you can’t take action; while you would like to see the partner achieve the goals, falling short really doesn’t mean anything either. remember, under our concept of accountability, we expect everyone to meet their performance goals because they are hardworking, firm-focused, qualified partners. and if they don’t have all of those qualities, then why are they partners? therefore, it is easy to see why we also expect the performance of many of them to significantly exceed the goals we are setting, which is how they earn even greater rewards.

accountability requires action and commitment

accountability is not passive; it usually requires a change in the philosophy of most cpa firm cultures. it demands that partners (and employees), not management, be and feel more empowered regarding their performance. it is up to the partners to live up to the expectations of their jobs, impact how much they earn, determine how much work product they produce and so on. it is up to management to become the resource to help those who want to help themselves.

if a partner wants to perform at just the minimum standard or expectation, that’s fine.

don’t kid yourself … the “minimum expectation” level of accomplishment should be “satisfactory” and therefore represent a good level of performance. this satisfactory level of performance should earn a base wage and as you will see when we start working through some examples, incentive pay as well. and from this point up, the more people accomplish, the more they earn.

accountability and performance variability

an important point to keep in mind is that we, as human beings, have good months and bad ones, good years and bad ones. what is going on in our personal lives has a lot to do with how we perform in our professional ones. therefore, if someone is going through a difficult time, such as a divorce, death in the family, major conflicts with extended family, etc., we can expect those events to spill over into our work life.

good performance systems allow people to have good years and bad years, with the result simply being a change in pay. and this is reasonable because in the good years, if the organization is doing better, it can share that gain with those who had the greatest hand in creating that success. and even when the organization has achieved about the same or worse regarding its overall performance, when one person performs exceptionally, that effort is usually making up for someone else’s shortfall. in essence, good performance systems allow and support the natural ebbs and flows of the productivity to naturally occur as humans live their lives.

next, we need to discuss the two types of criteria used in performance goals: objective and subjective.

objective performance criteria

objective, or quantitative, expectations are easy to process. if you expected a partner to bring in $150,000 of new business (with the assumption that this number is based on a satisfactory performance level, not an outstanding one), then the question is simply, “how much business did the partner bring in and how does that compare to the goal?” if the partner brought in $250,000, then clearly, overperformance occurred. if a partner brought in $100,000 in new business, then the partner clearly underperformed. we will get into how these two different actions might be treated under incentive pay systems later. for now, the point is that, with objective criteria, it is fairly easy to assess the level of accomplishment. a few common examples of objective criteria, both financial and non-financial, in addition to new business are:

  • additional services to existing clients
  • substantial increase in fees for the same project
  • profitability of client work
  • profitability of a department
  • billable/collectable hours
  • leverage of work being done (ratio of partner to staff work)
  • book of business managed
  • client satisfaction goals
  • total billings
  • write-offs
  • realization
  • collections
  • lunches or other meetings for staying up to date with clients
  • lunches or other meetings for staying up to date with referral sources
  • networking events attended
  • speaking engagements to promote the firm

while this list just scratches the surface of possible metrics, it shows that assessing whether any number of these is accomplished is fairly straightforward.

subjective performance criteria

on the other hand, subjective, or qualitative, criteria can make the assessment of achievement much more difficult. training and development goals, delegation goals and proper client transition goals are all examples of a more subjective expectation. in cases such as these, we need to come up with some form of objective support tool to help us assess progress.

for example, with delegation, we might ask that person to keep a diary of projects or work tasks that they have performed in the past that the partner delegated to someone else. we might then, on a monthly basis, sit with that partner and discuss the delegation experience, whether the proper monitoring was performed over the newly delegated task (in other words, was it actually delegated or “dumped”), etc. with training, we might survey the employees being trained at the beginning of the year and then a couple of times throughout the year to see how they feel about their training experience. we might ask for a development plan for each of the people the partner is responsible to improve and then discuss at specific intervals their assessment as to the success of the training implementation.

the point here is that, even with subjective criteria, we need to devise systems that allow us to catch people doing what they committed to do.

performance management is about putting systems in place that support personal evolution and success. it is about a structure that allows the people you are evaluating to demonstrate their progress over time, with ample opportunities along the way for you to provide insight, guidance and resources when necessary.

unfortunately, most people implement performance systems that are only visited twice a year – when they are created, and when it is time for the final assessment. these kinds of systems, while requiring less effort to implement, are often not even worth the time invested in them because they are not designed to help people meet and overachieve their expectations, but are simply in place to allow someone the ability to subjectively – with limited knowledge – judge others.

establishing the accountability process

setting up an “accountability and goal process” always sounds much easier than it actually is to implement. so for those who already think this process would be painful, just know that you still are probably underestimating the amount of agony in store. this leads us to the standard question, “if this is so awful, why would anyone do it?” the answer is both simple and abstract.

the simple part of the answer is that, anytime you can get all of your key people working as a team toward the same objectives, your chances of getting where you want to go and achieving the success you desire are infinitely better. the abstract view of this is usually alluded to by this sort of comment: “if all of my key people are conscientious, hard-working, and we share a common vision, shouldn’t we be able to get to the same place without all of this extra administrative hassle?” our answer to this question is “generally speaking, no.” to be clear, in our experience, you won’t get where you want to go consistently without this extra administrative hassle, especially as you grow larger. recognize that this change in required administration oversight is a function of success because sooner or later you will outgrow the honor system of performance self-assessment and self-alignment.

the most difficult piece of this process to buy into – and for many it takes years of trying to improve performance every other way first – is that this is not about getting your people to work harder. nor is this an effort to find a way to clone all of the partners in the image of one or two of the founding owners. this effort simply is about ensuring

  • that all partners, and often senior managers, operate above a minimum performance expectation;
  • that each has a self-development plan; and
  • that the sum of all of these senior people’s efforts are tied together to culminate in the achievement of the firm’s strategy.

this is the quintessential process required to take a firm to a higher level of performance.

the goal-setting process

to keep this simple, because it can get very complex extremely fast, let’s say that the firm has three strategies the partner group has created and mandated:

  1. for every partner to spend quality time with his or her top clients on a routine basis
  2. to close the competency gaps between partners and managers by better developing the firm’s managers
  3. to generate greater leverage for each partner so that they can manage more work and increase the bottom line

these are examples of very common goals set by firms today. so, where does the process go from here? it contains four phases:

guidance phase: continuing to keep our example simple, the managing partner would, in reality, most likely create goals for each partner in each of these three areas, and likely in a personal area for improvement as well. because all partners are different, not only in their aptitudes and attitudes but also because of their specific job duties, current book of clients they manage, current skills of the people they work with and so on, the actual goals for each partner will differ. while the goals of the firm are the same for everyone, how they are operationalized can differ dramatically from partner to partner.

we suggest that a managing partner’s first step should be to create a document that paints the strategies for change with a broad brush for each partner. we then suggest some customized ideas that the managing partner believes can help each partner play his or her part in achieving the firm’s strategic plan. we call this first-round guidance. we want the managing partner to point each partner in the best direction for them to focus. for example, regarding the goal of improving partner leverage, the managing partner might provide guidance to a partner who has poor delegation skills, such as, “i would like for you, over the next seven months, to push down the responsibility of managing $200,000 of your current workload to our managers, john and becky. please put together a plan for how this can be accomplished, clients you plan on transitioning, timeframes for the transition, and how you suggest that i monitor this to make sure it happens.”

this instruction might be followed with, “as this change is being made, estimate how much of your time will be freed up as well as how you would like to use that excess time to either fulfill this goal or help you better accomplish one of your other two goals.” during the guidance phase, we are guiding the partner to where the managing partner would like to see change but still giving the partner the ability to develop a plan that is comfortable to him or her. this allows the partner to build expectations around efforts already being made but possibly being overlooked.

consider this same goal now for a different partner who is already highly leveraged but with a number of marginal clients. the managing partner’s guidance might be totally different, such as, “identify $120,000 of the least profitable and least desirable work you manage and put together a plan for what you can do to change the overall profitability of this work. this could include raising fees, turning over client management of some clients to others, firing clients, developing missing skills needed to do the work economically, and so on.” this instruction might be followed by, “please put together your plan to approach this, covering when i can expect the process to be completed and how you suggest i monitor this to make sure it is done.” so, clearly, we have the same firm strategy, but when applied to each individual, the direction is customized to the particular strengths or weaknesses of each partner.

suggestion phase: following the guidance phase is the partner’s suggested approach, or the suggestion phase. during this phase, the partner responds to the broad direction of the managing partner and puts together his or her recommended detailed approach for accomplishing that directive while simultaneously suggesting metrics to be held accountable to, as well as identifying monitoring steps to ensure that the managing partner is kept abreast of the partner’s actual performance.

discussion phase: the next round is the discussion phase. during this stage, the partner will sit with the managing partner and defend why his or her suggestions from the suggestion phase are reasonable, comprehensive, fair and in line with firm strategy. often during this phase, because of the open dialogue, the managing partner gains new insight into the problems or issues as well as a better understanding of the effort being requested.

directive phase: the final phase is the directive phase. this is when the managing partner, at his or her sole discretion, locks in a partner’s goals, their relative priority to each other (among the several goals identified for each partner) and the allocation of performance incentives toward each of those goals.

remember, the first cut at the partner goals is based on the firm’s strategic plan. when we set goals for the managing partner to implement the strategic plan and hold him or her accountable for achieving those identified objectives, know that those same expectations will then be broken down and cascaded to the partners, and ultimately, to staff.

an example of the process

following is an example of this process with more detail to show how it might look in actual practice. let’s assume that one of the goals of a partner is to increase the most trusted business adviser activity for his or her top clients. the initial goal sheet for this one particular goal from the managing partner might look like this:

guidance

most trusted business adviser: value of incentive, 30%

partner expectations

  1. continuously updating his or her understanding of key client’s current and future priorities and the personal and business needs of its management
  2. develops relationships with “a” and high “b” key clients and referral sources of the firm that go beyond the services rendered
  3. maintains regular contact with key clients
  4. finds opportunity to assist the client outside of the partner’s specific competency areas

actions identified to obtain or improve attributes or achieve expectations

  1. schedule quarterly meeting with “a” clients and semiannual meetings with high “b” clients. prepare a list or schedule to review during your meetings with the managing partner.
  2. during those meetings, update your understanding of these clients and look for ways to develop relationships with clients that go beyond the service we render.
  3. look for cross-selling opportunities, introduction to other firm personnel, and opportunities to refer other professionals from your network. during your meetings with the managing partner, review the context of some of those meetings.
  4. some of the information that would indicate that your understanding of the a and b clients is expanding beyond merely attest and tax would be by having an understanding and knowledge of the following:
  • revenue goals of clients for 20xx
  • strategic initiatives for each client for the next years
  • tactical priorities for each client for the next 18 months
  • opportunities clients are hoping to be able to leverage
  • product or service offering changes

note to partner from managing partner: “the preceding items are for your consideration. please review the expectation, and then look through the actions identified. the preceding actions are ideas. please consider how you think you should best approach the objective of improving as your clients’ most trusted business adviser and list an approach with which you are comfortable to achieve this objective.”

after the managing partner and the partner go back and forth as to what makes sense – articulating timeframes, ways to measure success, etc. – while in this case the expectations have not changed (they could have through discussion), the actions steps become much clearer and might look like this:

suggestion

most trusted business adviser: value of incentive, 35%

actions identified to obtain or improve attributes or achieve expectations

  1. before january 31st, i will deliver a list of my “a” and high “b” clients and referral sources to you (the managing partner). that list will identify the people in those companies that i plan on contacting.
  2. before january 31st, i will create a calendar identifying the month i plan on visiting each of my “a” clients. i intend to see each of them during tax season, and i will schedule three other visits during the year on the calendar (which i will identify as a breakfast meeting, lunch meeting, dinner meeting, entertainment outing or on-site company visit).
  3. before january 31st, i will create a calendar identifying the month i plan on visiting each of my high “b” clients. i intend to see each of them during tax season, and i will schedule one other visit during the year on the calendar (which i will identify as a breakfast meeting, lunch meeting, dinner meeting, entertainment outing or on-site company visit).
  4. quarterly, at a meeting you schedule, i will sit with you and conduct a high-level review of the visits i made during that quarter as well as review my plan for the upcoming quarter.
  5. my objective is that by the end of each week during a week when i have a meeting with one of my identified “a” or high “b” clients (but i want to be held accountable for a two-week compliance period), i will update our salesforce.com customer relationship management system with the information i gathered during my meeting with my clients. i will include in that update that client’s expected revenues for the coming year, what we are currently doing for them, scheduled work we have in the backlog, services i think they need over the next 18 months and the client’s current priorities during that same 18-month timeframe. four times a year, at your discretion, you should check the customer relationship management system after an appointment you know i have made to verify whether i am updating the system on a timely basis.
  6. i will also keep a running ledger of new business referred by each of these clients, new work scheduled for each of these clients, price increases of more than 4 percent or $1,000 (whichever is more) for existing recurring work for each of these clients and change orders for existing work for each of these clients, and report that to you during our quarterly meetings scheduled per preceding item 4.

at this point, given the clarity of the action steps along with the details, metrics and timeframes, the directive phase of this simply involves the managing partner communicating back to the partner that this plan is approved. had the partner left something out or not specified a way for the managing partner to catch the partner achieving each action of his or her goals, that information would have been included in the final version sent to the partner.

the important point to make here is that the managing partner should be setting goals that are based on the normal expectations of a partner. the goals, as mentioned earlier in this document, shouldn’t be established assuming exceptional performance. when exceptional performance is achieved, some reward calculated at something greater than 100 percent for that goal incentive should be given.