{"id":48823,"date":"2016-07-10t05:02:18","date_gmt":"2016-07-10t09:02:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/48e130086c.nxcli.net\/?p=48823"},"modified":"2018-08-17t02:52:33","modified_gmt":"2018-08-17t06:52:33","slug":"data-used-to-evaluate-partner-performance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/\/www.g005e.com\/2016\/07\/10\/data-used-to-evaluate-partner-performance\/","title":{"rendered":"the 8 basics for data-based partner performance evaluations"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a>plus: 3 choices for setting the reporting year.<\/strong><\/p>\n by marc rosenberg<\/span><\/i> there is no standard list of data to review for evaluating partners.<\/p>\n more on partner compensation:<\/b> 5 types of partner evaluations<\/a> | should the mp be the highest paid partner?<\/a> | integrating partner comp with strategic planning<\/a> | partner pay: the declining importance of book of business<\/a> | 3 non-performance-based comp systems<\/a> | 3 subjective compensation systems<\/a> | what partners earn and how they earn it<\/a> | why most partner comp systems are performance-based<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n but here is a good, solid list of the eight basics:<\/p>\n
\npartner comp: art & science<\/span><\/i><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n