[foundation-board] Follow up from last OK board meeting, and compensation committee

Mon Mar 30 10:50:35 UTC 2015

Would be delighted to have you on the staff comp cttee this year Karin,
thank you

>From OK when staff are in place:
ED (for now myself/Rufus)
HR Head (for now myself/Rufus)
Finance (Michelle)
+ board member (Karin then Tim)

Regards
Fiona

On 29 March 2015 at 14:19, Karin Christiansen <k.christiansen at party.coop>
wrote:

>  Fiona,
>
>
>
> Tim is up for the Compensation Committee – but was concerned his lack of
> background and the suggestion ended up that I could join the first one.
> Does that work?
>
>
>
> He wanted to know who else is on it also from the OK staff end.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Karin
>
>
>
> *From:* Karin Christiansen
> *Sent:* 28 March 2015 20:07
> *To:* OKF Board Mailing List
> *Cc:* Fiona Thompson; mtisne at omidyar.com; 'Penny Handscomb'
> *Subject:* Follow up from last OK board meeting, and compensation
> committee
>
>
>
> Dear All – couple of quick issues:
>
>
>
> *1.      **Follow up on the last board meeting and leadership transition*
>
>
>
> Apologies for the delay in this. In addition to clearing the annual report
> we had an extensive discussion about where the organisation is at, pace of
> change, and there were a couple of key parts that we thought it was
> important to make sure the whole Board had sight of because they affect how
> we collectively make decision that support the transition as well as just
> making sure there was a clear understanding of where things are at amongst
> everyone on the board.
>
>
>
> *ACTION:  Follow up conversation between Penny (and Fiona if possible),
> and Helen and Jane would be vital to make sure we are all on the same level
> of information for making decisions about the leadership transition and the
> months ahead.  I will do a separate email to you all so you have each
> other’s contacts. (Tim I will include you in that)*
>
>
>
> With the new ED negotiations well underway I have also have started
> conversations with Rufus and Fiona about roles and timelines – both for the
> organisation, and the 3 individuals.  Clearly finalising and timing of
> Pavel’s appointment is key element but I wanted to just get the ball
> rolling (and they are going to be the best people to come up with a plan
> around this so I am not proposing anything!)
>
>
>
> *2.      **Open Knowledge Staff Compensation Committee – is anyone up for
> joining this?  *
>
>
>
> Fiona has requested that a member of the board sit on the annual staff
> compensation committee. They envisage this being a two hour meeting
> (virtual is likely) with approximately half an hour preparation. The
> compensation strategy is based on the principles set out below. Key to note
> is that the compensation review process is not driven by performance
> assessment, so familiarity with individuals performance is not necessary.
> In fact, they are specifically looking to increase objectivity on the
> committee with people who are not influenced by individual performance.
> This is what makes Board involvement valuable.
>
>
>
> They are hoping to schedule a meeting in the 3rd week of April (week
> commencing 20th April). The plan is then to announce  decisions to
> individuals in the beginning of May. Pay changes would come into effect for
> June and would last a year.
>
>
>
> *ACTION: Would anyone be willing and available to support OK in this way?*
>
>
>
> *Compensation strategy*
>
>
>
> 1. Open Knowledge aims to pay at the 50th percentile of
> industry/market/peer rates
>
> 2. HR  generate role descriptions that cover the organisational roles and
> create salary bands (using information from market comparison)
>
> 3. These salary bands are adjusted for inflation as appropriate to ensure
> there we don't systematically drop from the 50th percentile target
>
> 4. Compensation is driven principally by the role. Real changes to
> compensation (ie not the nominal changes driven by inflation) occur through
> change of role (vertical promotion to a more senior role title or perhaps
> less commonly, a lateral move into a role with a different band.)
>
> 5. Compensation is not principally driven by performance review.
> Performance reviews are about an additional source of feedback designed to
> help individuals improve their performance and are done after pay reviews.
> Above average (compared to industry/market/external peers) performance and
> professional improvement is considered the standard and isn't a driver for
> increased compensation. Consistent under-performance will typically lead to
> conversations about fit with the organisation and not salary decreases.
>
> 6. Individuals will know the salary band for their role. Bands across the
> organisation are not published to respect the confidentiality of staff
> given the small size of the organisation. Line managers will know salary
> bands for those they manage and will be responsible for treating the
> information as sensitive and HR confidential out of respect for colleagues.
>
> 7. The compensation review for staff is a distinct process to the
> contractor pay review.
>
> 8. There are no regional pay determinations.
>
>
>
> The compensation committee review process:
>
>
>
> a) Are our salary bands still representative of the 50th percentile for
> those roles?
>
> b) If yes, is there a case for an inflationary increase to both top and
> bottom of the band as well as individual placement within those bands (with
> there being a general presumption that there is a case, typically about 2%)
>
> c) Are all our individuals paid within the band for their role? If under,
> they will be offered an increase to put them within the band. If above,
> they will be notified that they won't get an increase until the band has
> caught them up. We don't propose reducing compensation if people are
> overpaid for their roles.
>
> d) If inflation changes the bands, ensure all staff members maintain their
> position relative to the bands.
>
> e) Does the organisational surplus offer any scope for discretionary
> salary increases while maintaining financial sustainability? If so, line
> managers may be offered small pots of money which they can recommend salary
> increases to those they manage. The compensation committee have final
> determination on any salary changes. It is worth noting that these sums
> will be small and not make significant changes to salary. The intention is
> not to have discretionary increases drive compensation changes. All
> compensation will need to stay within bands, so a line manager
> recommendation cannot push a salary above the top of a band.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Karin Christiansen*
>
> General Secretary
>
> [image: rainbow]
>
>
>
>  [image: logo-horiz-wmf-purple] <http://party.coop/>
>
> 020 7367 4155
> k.christiansen at party.coop
> www.party.coop
>
> www.keepit.coop
>
> [image: cid:image003.png at 01D054DA.AAE06220] <http://keepit.coop/>
>
> *Let’s keep the Co-operative Group true to co-operative values and owned
> by its members*
> Join the campaign keepit.coop | @letskeepitcoop
> <https://twitter.com/intent/follow?screen_name=letskeepitcoop> |
> fb.me/keepitcoop
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/foundation-board/attachments/20150330/4a134473/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 681 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/foundation-board/attachments/20150330/4a134473/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 34089 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/foundation-board/attachments/20150330/4a134473/attachment-0007.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3578 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/foundation-board/attachments/20150330/4a134473/attachment-0008.png>