构建战略性全面薪酬运营模型

Building a StrategicTotal Rewards Building a Strategic Total Rewards Operating Model Total Rewards Research Team Most total rewards leaders believe their functions’ operating models cannot supportchanging business needs, and many are restructuring to keep up. The most effectivetotal rewards leaders build processes and roles to help the function engage the Overview Enterprise changes are shifting organizations’ priorities, forcing total rewards (TR) to restructure therewards package, adjust compensation plans, and price and negotiate salaries for new-to-world roles. To strategically manage rewards in a changing enterprise, many TR leaders are restructuring — andseeking how-to guidance from their industry peers. This research covers how the most effective TRleaders address structure and staffing, business partnerships, new roles and skills, and metrics for Key Findings Seventy-three percent of organizations expect more enterprise changes (e.g., cultural change,restructuring, market expansion) in the next three years, but nearly 90% of TR leaders do not feel they■ No one successful approach to structure and staffing the TR function exists, but less than one-third of Due to a lack of resources to manage the influx of exceptions and special requests, TR leaders are Benefits and compensation job descriptions do not emphasize three of the four competencies with the■ While nearly all TR leaders track metrics — most commonly cost and engagement — few are satisfiedwith their ability to use those metrics to assess the impact of the function.■ Recommendations To restructure the operating model for enterprise change, TR leaders must: Enable business partners to make informed trade-offs by educating them about TR workflows andreframing business requests to help them test assumptions and focus on priority problems.■ Develop roles that enable collaboration and best-practice sharing by integrating enterprise-focusedroles into the TR function and designating TR managers as network connectors within a distributed■ Assess TR’s impact on enterprise objectives by using metrics that align to the function’s andorganization’s priorities and leveraging workarounds in the face of data challenges, such as building■ Enterprise Changes Require TR Action The typical organization has undertaken five enterprise changes in the past three years, and 73% oforganizations expect more enterprise changes in the next three years.With each enterprise change, the The three most common changes require TR to act (see Figure 1): Culture change — TR must restructure rewards packages to reflect HR strategy. Restructuring — TR must adjust compensation plans to reflect new talent priorities.■ However, TR leaders do not feel equipped to respond. Nearly 90% do not believe they have thestructureand skills within their function to support the business through its changes today. In response, most organizations are addressing opportunities to close these gaps. About 83% of TRfunctions are either just beginning or have recently completed changes, something the broader HR Figure 2: State of TR Changes TR leaders are seeking guidance and validation on their approaches to these changes. Their questions 1. Structure and staffing—What does a high-performing function look like? 2. Business partnerships — How can we partner with the business more efficiently and effectively? 3. New roles and skills — What people and skills do we need on our teams today to get our influx of new 4. Metrics for success — How do we measure, and in turn show, our impact on enterprise objectives? To determine the most effective TR functions and leaders to study, we developed an index to assessfunctional effectiveness based on leaders’ input on the following categories: Internal structural alignment■ Collaboration capability■ Staff capability■Business delivery■ When we assessed TR leaders’ responses through the index, we found that only 28% scored as highlyeffective.Our research focuses on that group of organizations to determine how they differed from the 4 Components of Operating Model Changes Structure and Staffing To uncover the factors that the best TR functions shared regarding their structure and staffing, welooked at over 100 attributes — from what sort of rewards the function offers, to distribution ofemployees, to vendor usage. When we compared effective functions’ structure and staffing approaches, Still, our benchmarks show a few trends in the evolution of TR structure and staffing. First, work in the TR function is increasingly interconnected. In 2017, 30% of TR staff worked on acombination of compensation and benefits, compared with just 3% in 2013. Further, functions areincreasingly using a central COE team, with over half using regional and local input on top (see Figure 3). Second, the geographic distribution of compensation staff and benefits staff is roughly the same. Inabout two-thirds of organizations, staff are distributed; in one-