Flawed remuneration and compensation system
At the beginning of the financial year, 2020/2021 at my firm, BImpex Inc. human resource department informed the employee of new remuneration and compensation structure. At the core of the new remuneration structure, the method was using KMS to measure employee productivity based on the level of sales and individual revenues. Since the firm offers the retail business of computer and business software, the KMS as a compensation system was flawed since it failed to prioritize the level of employee skills and human capital, tenure at the firm, the organizational rank of staff, and individual input in overall decision making. The KMS method also failed to factor employee benefits, including medical covers and paid leave, since the system was solely focused on the scope of sales and revenues as parameters for compensation.
In my position as a sales representative in one of the local retail software outlets, the memo on the new remuneration and compensation system would reduce my earnings, together with the earnings of colleagues. The management at BImpex Inc. justifies the system as a means of adapting to organizational change, and an avenue of reducing costs associated with managing a diverse pool of employees. In my opinion, the KMS system could facilitate corporate exploitation of employees, since it advances capitalist ideals of lean manufacturing and costs, and maximizing net incomes through unjustified means. During the first business quarter after implementation of KMS, a dozen employees were fired since the system isolated particular employees as redundant. Furthermore, a dozen other employees at BImpex Inc. were placed on probation, pending further review based on data sources from the system. A few employees in the first business quarter volunteered to terminate their contracts since the KMS system posted reduced salaries and earnings.
The ability of senior management to implement Knowledge Management System (KMS) as an organizational change priority ought to consider technical skills and human capital potential to avoid a mismatch of objectives of the corporate culture. Methods of motivating employees and minimizing chances of firing include offering unlimited access to quality information in decision making. My analysis from experience is that training of employees at BImpex Inc. is crucial to eliminate productivity redundancies and lower pay for employees since the remuneration method is dependent on projects completed by staff. Training of employees correlates with increased productivity and earning as the system offers secure storage and methods of retrieving information in a timely manner and reducing delays in project completion. Segregating employees based on informational access at the firm, an organization suffers from reduced productivity since employees do not create synergies at the workplace. Furthermore, I believe the KMS system ought to minimize violation of employee privacy and confidentiality since senior managers could spy on staff performance while using the platform.
In the process of implementing KMS to complement reliable transfer of business information, the management has a duty to enhance employee morale and motivation, thereby recording improved sales and revenues as indicated by the system. Methods of motivating employees and minimizing chances of firing include offering project information and progress in real-time, thereby eliminating delays that encourage poor performance. Additionally, firms that focus on motivating staff and welfare benefits gains competitive advantage by completing targets on time and avoiding the costs of unfinished work. Moreover, the KMS implementation process is crucial in eliminating bureaucracies that employees face while seeking project approval by senior business managers, hence becoming a pint of progress.
Information sharing and transfer ought to be freely accessible by all levels of employees in a vertical organizational structure. Free access to information and essential work documents in the KMS system is crucial in the decision-making abilities of employees, and limiting privileged information translates to informal segregation methods. By dividing employees based on informational access at the firm, an organization suffers from reduced productivity since employees do not create synergies at the workplace. Since the KMS is a unique system that goes beyond just a knowledge repository, it should offer various employees with unlimited access, and facilitating improvement of productivity despite diverse personalities.
Recommendations.
Since the system ought to guide the human resource department on proper remuneration methods, KMS ought to be readjusted to factor the qualitative skills of employees. Reconciling the remuneration method would offer satisfactory salaries and wage levels while increasing acceptance of KMS among colleagues. BImpex Inc. ought to train employees on the utilization of the KMS system to complete tasks and access privileged information that is essential in decision making. I believe the KMS system is suitable for creating a value-based corporate culture by complementing employee skills in improving the quality of customer care. An equitable system ought to secure job opportunities for employees compared to becoming an avenue of firing expert human capital on unjustified claims.
Moreover, the utilization of skills mapping techniques is essential in enhancing expert employee skills and decision making as a method of establishing value-based corporate culture. The management also ought to offer a written description of the formula and process the KMS system utilizes in remunerating employees and determining talent for promotion and firing. Access to the system ought to be freely accessible to all levels of employees hence eliminating inequity in informational access and utilization.
I believe that increasing the efficiency of the audit of employee productivity ought not to offer opportunities for discrimination of staff within a competitive and diverse organizational culture. Employees are rewarded based on merit as data and information in the KMS system indicate. By auditing employee performance based on productivity and level of sales as noted in the KMS, underperforming employees ought to be offered guidance to enhance quality and job performance. KMS ought to facilitate the reliable transfer of business information since the management has a duty to strengthen employee morale and motivation, thereby recording improved sales and revenues as indicated by the system. Efficient and dependable methods of remunerating employees focus on compensating the level of skills while minimizing antagonizing welfare benefits. My experience with KMS is that it offers a skills mapping technique that senior managers could utilize to match roles and available human capital. By allocating employees with roles they are comfortable at handling, KMS could facilitate an increase in job productivity and improvement in product qualities.
In my opinion and experience on best methods of determining salaries and wage rates, the KMS has to update information autonomously to eliminate human errors that encourage discrimination of staff. The equitability of an autonomous KSM system at BImpex Inc. is setting a base pay of every employee that is inclusive of welfare benefits. Secondly, an autonomous system limits manipulation of data leading to isolation of employees for victimization or firing based on malicious intentions by senior managers. An equitable system ought to secure job opportunities for employees compared to becoming an avenue of firing expert human capital on unjustified claims.