My profitable observations were not (yet) rewarded

[darkrose50]

My profitable observations were not (are not yet?) rewarded. My ego is quite bruised.

I increased the productive hours of the workday for 80-ish agents by 37.5%+ of the day (3/8 hours in the day, sometimes more) or 160%+ (8 productive hours when we had 5 before, sometimes adding more than 3-productive-hours to the day). This implementation was made before the six busiest weeks in the year. This was not taken into account when calculating who would win the MVP (that comes with a paid week off, a trip to Cancun, an award, and a raise).

I found that the client was not paying us for some of our work, and has not been for 3-4 years. So money will be collected for work done in the past and will mean being paid in the future for this type of work as a result. This was not taken into account when calculating who would win the MVP (that comes with a paid week off, a trip to Cancun, an award, and a raise).

There are other contributions, but these were the major contributions.

I learned that I need to point these things out in the future, because assuming that others will take contributions outside of my job description into consideration when entering numbers into a formula for my job description is something that I should have not done. Doing extra things, that simply must have made impressive profits, were simply not part of the formula that they used. I do not think that it even occurred to my managers to notice or mention that my extra contributions were not in the formula.

People do not question rules or procedures. This behavior is quite something I do not understand. I think that people are just crazy bad at resource management and/or do not care.

Not only do I want to point out ways to be more profitable, but I then also have to remind others that I did so, and remind them that my profitable observations should be taken into consideration. I need to remind people that my contributions should be part of the formula, or they will just plum forget about all of the value that I added that is beyond my job description. Apparently people just do not notice that the formula does not have an "other" entry.

Else they will completely and utterly forgot to add my contributions . . . entirely . . . 100% of them. I suppose in the future, before the formulas are calculated, I need to beat my chest like some gorilla in order to remind people of the value outside of my job description that I added. It seems like a huge jerk move, but else I will not get ANY credit.

Frankly, I was stunned. There is a snowballs' chance in hell that anyone added more value than I did this year. I am a little upset about this, as you can tell.

[JeenLeen]

First off, sympathy. That stinks, and your upset seems rather reasonable. I hope a manager was at least apologetic that it wasn't factored in.

I'll risk some advice: maybe you can get those attributed to next year's formula, since they weren't this year? Or, if not the actions themselves, the continuous positive results (increased productivity, increased revenue from that client).

Unfortunately, managers probably do need to be reminded of stuff like this. I'd like to think they'd do an annual review with you before calculating MVP, so you get a chance to note accomplishments they may have missed. But it sounds like such wasn't the case. I could see just tracking some things in Word or an Excel sheet, and sending it to your manager close to the employee-review time, to make sure everything that should be noted was.
To management's credit, if they have a lot of employees, it is possible they (or whoever was tasked with doing the formulas) simply forgot. But it's a shame your manager didn't add a note about this. These sound pretty major, so... yeah, a shame.

[darkrose50]

I just assumed that the contributions would be attributed to me. We had the best day ever during one day this past season. I was like . . . "Cool, they will do the math, and figure it out". Nope . . . the list of who won the MVP was released, and I was not on it.

I was later told that I was ranked #4/80-ish, and that I would get a raise, but my immediate manager did not know how much of a raise it would be. We know how much each pay level currently earns, so this just made my mind go wild trying to figure out if this means that:

[A] All the pay levels are getting some yet unknown cost of living raise.
[B] I am going up one pay level, and/or all the pay levels are also getting some yet unknown cost of living raise.
[D] I may be going up more than one pay level, and she did not yet know how many, and/or all the pay levels are also getting some yet unknown cost of living raise.
[E] They are offering me a new position.
[F] She did not recall the amounts off the top of her head and/or everyone is getting some yet unknown cost of living raise.

I think that I may know more on Friday, when I think people's titles will change in the system (there are five titles with differing pay levels for my position . . . in my group I am the only 2/5, there is one 4/5, and a mess of folks that are 1/5).

[AMFV]

I'm going to tell you what I was told the first union job I worked. "Don't give them anything extra cause it won't matter" and it didn't. Unless you have something in writing saying that you'll be rewarded for something, nothing extra you do will matter really, not come layoff time, not come raise time. It does suck though.

[darkrose50]

Many of my co-workers seem to think that it just does not matter what you contribute. I am not sure that I have the willpower not to point out something that is costing the company lots of money. I am not sure that I would want to not point these things out anyways. But MVP is pretty glaringly . . . Most Valued Player . . . and no one could have even came close to adding value that 80-ish insurance agents going from non-productive to productive for 3-hours per day each added. An observation like that one comes by once in a blue moon.

[Liquor Box]

I'm going to tell you what I was told the first union job I worked. "Don't give them anything extra cause it won't matter" and it didn't. Unless you have something in writing saying that you'll be rewarded for something, nothing extra you do will matter really, not come layoff time, not come raise time. It does suck though.

I don't think this is true in lots of workplaces, it may be in some. You may not rewarded directly with a payment (or other benefit) for the particular thing you did, your performance will still be a factor (usually the crucial factor) in promotions/payrises.

[2D8HP]

"They don't count how much you do, they count how many mistakes you make"

- What a now deceased City employee told me my first year on the job

[Tvtyrant]

My profitable observations were not (are not yet?) rewarded. My ego is quite bruised.

I increased the productive hours of the workday for 80-ish agents by 37.5%+ of the day (3/8 hours in the day, sometimes more) or 160%+ (8 productive hours when we had 5 before, sometimes adding more than 3-productive-hours to the day). This implementation was made before the six busiest weeks in the year. This was not taken into account when calculating who would win the MVP (that comes with a paid week off, a trip to Cancun, an award, and a raise).

I found that the client was not paying us for some of our work, and has not been for 3-4 years. So money will be collected for work done in the past and will mean being paid in the future for this type of work as a result. This was not taken into account when calculating who would win the MVP (that comes with a paid week off, a trip to Cancun, an award, and a raise).

There are other contributions, but these were the major contributions.

I learned that I need to point these things out in the future, because assuming that others will take contributions outside of my job description into consideration when entering numbers into a formula for my job description is something that I should have not done. Doing extra things, that simply must have made impressive profits, were simply not part of the formula that they used. I do not think that it even occurred to my managers to notice or mention that my extra contributions were not in the formula.

People do not question rules or procedures. This behavior is quite something I do not understand. I think that people are just crazy bad at resource management and/or do not care.

Not only do I want to point out ways to be more profitable, but I then also have to remind others that I did so, and remind them that my profitable observations should be taken into consideration. I need to remind people that my contributions should be part of the formula, or they will just plum forget about all of the value that I added that is beyond my job description. Apparently people just do not notice that the formula does not have an "other" entry.

Else they will completely and utterly forgot to add my contributions . . . entirely . . . 100% of them. I suppose in the future, before the formulas are calculated, I need to bet my chest like some gorilla in order to remind people of the value outside of my job description that I added. It seems like a huge jerk move, but else I will not get ANY credit.

Frankly, I was stunned. There is a snowballs' chance in hell that anyone added more value than I did this year. I am a little upset about this, as you can tell.

When I worked at a tech support company we were expected to hand type a set of notes on how each phone call went. These notes were fairly copious, but essentially identical each time. As you worked long term you learned how to use stickies and shortcuts to copy and paste from.

All in all it took 2 minutes for each set of notes, some people being faster and some slower. 2 minutes out of an expected 8 minute call.

A coworker made a button based excel program that allowed you to perform the same task in about 15 seconds during the call, saving the company millions of dollars a year. He was given some hats and mugs, no raise, and the call time expectation was moved down to 6 minutes.

[AMFV]

I don't think this is true in lots of workplaces, it may be in some. You may not rewarded directly with a payment (or other benefit) for the particular thing you did, your performance will still be a factor (usually the crucial factor) in promotions/payrises.

It can be, but more often than not your performance only needs to be at a certain level to get those. Above that, nobody cares again. Unless you start making mistakes, and they definitely notice those. Certainly I wouldn't count on that performance helping much. Unless there's some kind of in-writing bonus policy.

[Chen]

Many of my co-workers seem to think that it just does not matter what you contribute. I am not sure that I have the willpower not to point out something that is costing the company lots of money. I am not sure that I would want to not point these things out anyways. But MVP is pretty glaringly . . . Most Valued Player . . . and no one could have even came close to adding value that 80-ish insurance agents going from non-productive to productive for 3-hours per day added. An observation like that one comes by once in a blue moon.

So what exactly did you do? It could easily be something that is overlooked in the company’s metrics or they consider difficult to actually quantify. You’ve done the value calculation but it may be something thats easily overlooked. You should certainly inform your managers of your contribution during your performance appraisals though.

[JeenLeen]

2 minutes out of an expected 8 minute call.

A coworker made a button based excel program that allowed you to perform the same task in about 15 seconds during the call, saving the company millions of dollars a year. He was given some hats and mugs, no raise, and the call time expectation was moved down to 6 minutes.

A management thing that really bugs me is when efficiency is punished. In your story, the initial result was huge earnings for the company and a lot less hassle/stress for all employees -- at least, I assume making that 8-minute limit most of the time mattered a lot. But then management moves the time expectation down 2 minutes, essentially eliminating the benefit to employees and potentially making employees dislike the guy who made the efficient program. (I know I might feel resentful, even if I acknowledged it as irrational.) That really stinks.

[darkrose50]

So what exactly did you do? It could easily be something that is overlooked in the company’s metrics or they consider difficult to actually quantify. You’ve done the value calculation but it may be something thats easily overlooked. You should certainly inform your managers of your contribution during your performance appraisals though.

I am going to a promotion ceremony tomorrow, and they may mention my contributions then.

It is also a good idea to ask if they can add my contributions into the formula for next year.

Well for 3-4 years the call forwarding from my team's client's numbers were turned off at 4:00 PM, we worked until 7:00 PM, and during the busy season sometimes until 9:00 PM or 11:00 PM. It took me talking to five managers, in turn, to find one that believed me. I am glad that the fifth one did. The first four dismissed the idea out of hand saying something like people are eating dinner or something crazy like that. Exactly at 4:00 PM the call queue would go from calls to no-calls . . . well it dropped something like 90%, or more. Effectively to zero for most people. We still got calls that were not forwarded to us by the client. I joked that I could take a nap from 4:00 PM on, and that I should bring a pillow and blanket. I could have seriously napped from 4:00 PM on, only to be awakened by the rare stray call.

Sometimes I have good ideas. I am good at efficiency. I notice these types of things often-ish. Likely never one this profitable. Likely never one this easy to measure with math. This observation absolutely made quantifiable profits. This was real money.

Flipping that switch turned 3+ hours of the day from unproductive to productive . . . across 80-ish insurance agents. This must have been truckloads of calls, sales, and profits. Sales calls go to the client first . . . so a great deal of these were profit that we would not have seen IF they were to call back. Just the brute force of 3+ hours of more productivity, per person, in the day is something huge.

Efficiency seems to be my thing. I am good with managing resources. The client requested a copy of every observation I make, and by bosses seem to forward on observations I make to other bosses. I was stunned to not be thanked for something that was so easy to measure. Something that was, to me, so blatantly obvious. It should have been obvious, right?

I have Asperger's Syndrome and sometimes overestimate what people know or what they will do with the information that I give them. Frankly I think that my managers forgot. At the same time people will often want to share or take credit on this or that idea. I just need to roll with it. I am grateful to have a job. It can be hard to keep a job with Asperger's Syndrome.

[darkrose50]

When I worked at a tech support company we were expected to hand type a set of notes on how each phone call went. These notes were fairly copious, but essentially identical each time. As you worked long term you learned how to use stickies and shortcuts to copy and paste from.

All in all it took 2 minutes for each set of notes, some people being faster and some slower. 2 minutes out of an expected 8 minute call.

A coworker made a button based excel program that allowed you to perform the same task in about 15 seconds during the call, saving the company millions of dollars a year. He was given some hats and mugs, no raise, and the call time expectation was moved down to 6 minutes.

Yeah I worked myself and 7-9 other people out of our jobs once. I just cannot help myself sometimes. Well I was offered a job 'in the field" but incorrectly thought that would mean that I would be climbing up poles, in the snow and in the rain. I took the severance package. This was one the worst mistakes that I ever made. I was young and stupid. I am older, and less stupid now.

[Cheesegear]

Yeah I worked myself and 7-9 other people out of our jobs once. I just cannot help myself sometimes. Well I was offered a job 'in the field" but incorrectly thought that would mean that I would be climbing up poles, in the snow and in the rain. I took the severance package. This was one of my worst mistakes ever. I was young and stupid. I am less stupid now.

I took a weekend course in Excel once. Once I got back to work, I created a bunch of macros and lookup tables, and decreased everyone's workload by about half... So half the workforce - including me (last in, first out) - was let go because there simply wasn't any work to do after two weeks on my spreadsheets that I had created.

Two months later my work called me back, because something had happened with my data tables, and they didn't know how to fix it, and could I please come back?
...No. I created the spreadsheets and increased productivity. They knew that I had done it. They should have fired everyone except me, because I was the only one who was actually doing the work. Besides, I had a new job by then - which they provided me a reference for - and why would I come back just so they can fire me again after I fix all their tables?

[darkrose50]

At a past job my supervisor told me to stop working after a point. We needed to complete 50-tickets a day, and I was to STOP at 80-tickets. I would usually finish in 30-90 minutes. I spent the rest of the day surfing the interwebs and debating politics (I had fun, and my writing got better). I could have safely done the work of 3-5 people. The guy that sat by me was paid like 150% more, and hardly did any work. I was not really rewarded. I suppose that I am just forgettable.

[Rogar Demonblud]

No, a major point of business school training is using employees to make yourself look good, but making sure they don't get acknowledged. Because then they get promoted out of your department and make someone else look good. Just like you don't get rid of (much) deadwood, because the size of your department is a status symbol.

Amazing how much primatology explains corporate behavior. Except for their habit of looking like zombie dinosaurs shambling forth to crush the world underfoot.

[Chen]

No, a major point of business school training is using employees to make yourself look good, but making sure they don't get acknowledged. Because then they get promoted out of your department and make someone else look good. Just like you don't get rid of (much) deadwood, because the size of your department is a status symbol.

Amazing how much primatology explains corporate behavior. Except for their habit of looking like zombie dinosaurs shambling forth to crush the world underfoot.

What business school did you go to? If someone can get work done with LESS people that's viewed as good here. If one department gets something done with 10 people but another gets the same done with 5, then the department with the 5 is the one that's going to get the accolades.

[Rogar Demonblud]

No, the one with 5 will get its budget slashed and the execs involved will lose out in promotions because they only handle five employees. Corporations are institutionalized inefficiency.

[Jay R]

Over the course of your lifetime, if you do more and better than others, you will be rewarded for it.

It is not true that each time you do more and better than others, you will be rewarded for it.

[darkrose50]

It is likely due to my inability to sell myself.

[Chen]

No, the one with 5 will get its budget slashed and the execs involved will lose out in promotions because they only handle five employees. Corporations are institutionalized inefficiency.

I won't deny this can happen. But in a good company it won't. If two departments are getting similar things done and one has double the people of the other, that's a bad sign. I'm managing budgets right now and when I see something like that its indication that the larger department has larger issues. This results in more hassels for the execs in charge.

And yes I agree it can certainly go on like that for some time. But then if it continues like this and people see whats actually going on the execs don't just get reduced bonuses they get fired (as I've seen through personal experience).

[Gnoman]

As an employee, I've seen that the first impulse of any new manager is "fire everyone you can get away with firing, so short term costs go down and you look good." Ruthless head cutting, often well below the level required to do the job in the first place, is a pretty standard management tactic nowadays. It is a big part of what killed Sears.

[2D8HP]

It is likely due to my inability to sell myself.

Your "inability to sell" yourself"?

Never blame yourself for not being a hucksters and a shill.

Blame yourself for believing that increasing their profits will benefit you, and know now that your exploiters don't care about you.

Try to get a union job, or have your own business.

[darkrose50]

I was ranked at #4/80. I received a mini-promotion from level 2/5 to level 3/5. #1/80, #2/80, and #7/80 also revived promotions. I am uncertain who #3/80, #5/80, and #6/80 are, but perhaps they are no longer with the company, or were they were promoted to a supervisor.

#1/80 went from level 4/5 to level 5/5
#2/80 went from level 1/5 to level 4/5
#4/80 (me) went from level 2/5 to level 3/5
#7/80 went from level 1/5 to level 3/5

I cannot help but the wonder what I did wrong to go up one level, when everyone else went up 2-3 levels (except the one that maxed out). It does not seem that my contributions outside of my job description are factored in. Perhaps my contributions outside of my job description are just not important, and I guess I should just stop bothering people with my ideas.

[Rogar Demonblud]

You're making them think instead of just allowing them to coast along because everything is alright and there are no problems. Humans hate having their illusions wrecked.

Also, arguably their bosses could decide they screwed up bad enough by not catching this earlier they need to be fired so someone else (who just happens to be loyal to the bosses) can get the job.

[Liquor Box]

It can be, but more often than not your performance only needs to be at a certain level to get those. Above that, nobody cares again. Unless you start making mistakes, and they definitely notice those. Certainly I wouldn't count on that performance helping much. Unless there's some kind of in-writing bonus policy.

Again, that's not my experience. My experience is that job advancement is much more merit based than you describe - not perfect because some people are better at self-promotion than others, but still probably the single most important factor.

Of course you and I are both from different countries, and have probably worked in different industries so our different experiences may be down to that.

[Liquor Box]

I was ranked at #4/80. I received a mini-promotion from level 2/5 to level 3/5. #1/80, #2/80, and #7/80 also revived promotions. I am uncertain who #3/80, #5/80, and #6/80 are, but perhaps they are no longer with the company, or were they were promoted to a supervisor.

#1/80 went from level 4/5 to level 5/5
#2/80 went from level 1/5 to level 4/5
#4/80 (me) went from level 2/5 to level 3/5
#7/80 went from level 1/5 to level 3/5

I cannot help but the wonder what I did wrong to go up one level, when everyone else went up 2-3 levels (except the one that maxed out). It does not seem that my contributions outside of my job description are factored in. Perhaps my contributions outside of my job description are just not important, and I guess I should just stop bothering people with my ideas.

Am I reading this right that you were ranked 4th in terms of performance out of 80 employees and were therefore promoted from the second tier to the third tier, or am I missing something.

Because, if I am understanding you correctly, it sounds like your performance was appropriately recognised with a high performance ranking and a promotion.

You may think that your discovery was so important that you deserve to be ranked higher than 4th, but it is up to your company precisely what it values in terms of performance - you probably don't know exactly what the others did either.

As for a couple of others going up more than one tier, that doesn't seem unreasonable either. Nobody whose perfromance was ranked lower than yours was promoted ahead of you.

Honestly, it seems like your performance was recognised, and that you were promoted accordingly. You just think the extent of that recognition should have been greater relative to others, and that seems to me to be a matter of discretion for the business which you are quibbling with.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Those aren't promotions. Just paybands. Dark Rose got bumped one level. Everyone else got two bumps, except the guy who went to the maximum.

[Liquor Box]

Those aren't promotions. Just paybands. Dark Rose got bumped one level. Everyone else got two bumps, except the guy who went to the maximum.

Ok.

I'm not sure its accurate to say "everyone else got two bumps...". Out of 80 employees DarkRose has identified that two of them got bumped two tiers. One of them outperformed him (on the company's analysis), and the other started off on a lower tier.

[Jay R]

A single action, no matter how great, is not the entire case for a raise. We don't know most of what happened last year, so we have no way to form an opinion.