{"id":48603,"date":"2016-04-24t05:00:18","date_gmt":"2016-04-24t09:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/48e130086c.nxcli.net\/?p=48603"},"modified":"2024-08-14t09:35:54","modified_gmt":"2024-08-14t13:35:54","slug":"48603","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/\/www.g005e.com\/2016\/04\/24\/48603\/","title":{"rendered":"3 non-performance-based comp systems"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a>hint: they don’t eliminate arguments.<\/strong><\/p>\n by marc rosenberg<\/span><\/i> the common thread to non-performance-based systems is that partners\u2019 compensation is not based on their performance, but on other factors that have nothing to do with performance. there are three main systems of this type:<\/p>\n more on partner compensation:<\/b> the 3 best partner compensation formulas<\/span><\/a> |<\/span> why firms use partner comp formulas<\/span><\/a> |<\/span> 3 tiers of compensation<\/span><\/a> | <\/span>partner compensation 101<\/span><\/a>|<\/span> what partners earn and how they earn it<\/span><\/a> | <\/span>partner compensation: an art, not a science<\/span><\/a> | <\/span>how partners view compensation: it\u2019s not all about the money<\/span><\/a> | <\/span>why most partner comp systems are performance-based<\/span><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\npartner comp: art & science<\/span><\/i><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n