Developer Motivation System

About how we chose a motivation system for Calltouch developers, says development manager Roman Khokhlov .


Image source

The topic of staff performance evaluation, KPI calculations, motivation and bonuses is old, but it will live for a long time. On the forums we run into a lot of endless discussions and holivars. From the point of view of evaluating the efficiency of the work of developers, and in IT as a whole, the situation is even more complicated - not a few broken copies. The work of the developer is the production and intellectual work in close conjunction, which are difficult and difficult to measure and measure. Plus, the result of applying this or that approach directly depends on the manager, and on the team, and on the organization of the process - some implemented approaches work, some do not work, and even harm.
')
When the Calltouch team chose the way we should go, we decided to start from simple and obvious things:

• transparent and understandable to all approach
• minimum bureaucracy
• minimal subjectivity in assessments
• openness, honesty and effectiveness,
• No one is mad.

The most difficult is, perhaps, a question of subjectivity. One way or another, but it appears in almost all approaches - more on that below.

On the advice of the “flock”, we selected several options:

1. Planning the goals and objectives for the reporting period - i.e. Before the beginning of the reporting period (month or quarter), an action plan and evaluation criteria based on the results are discussed with each other - if, simply, “Here are five tasks, you will do it — there will be a bonus”
2. Bonuses based on the results of projects - by projects is meant a certain pool of tasks, which gives some working functionality as its output.
3. Continuous assessment of the activities of employees according to various criteria during the reporting period.
4. The game "Guess the melody" - there is a task, colleagues discuss who will perform it faster. Did - got a plus to the award.
5. Also (suggested by one of our employees from the experience of past works) (quietly, in a whisper)) - "Here's a bonus for you, do not tell anyone."

Election results

Option 1

This option is not bad: there is a plan, there are agreed criteria. But the main disadvantage is that, firstly, it covers not such a large range of issues as we would like, secondly, in the world of Agile, when priorities can change already tomorrow, this approach will lead the employee to work out the agreed goals for a bonus, and cover your eyes on more important new sudden tasks.

Option 2

Yes, a good option. He did not approach us because not all employees are involved in significant projects. Plus, it is difficult to unequivocally assess the contribution of each to a particular project during teamwork. Another reason for rejecting such an idea is that projects can be protracted - more than the reporting period, and according to our calculations, linking to the reporting period is most convenient for the team.

Option 3

Looking ahead, we have chosen this approach, therefore, all the pros and cons below.

Option 4

Perhaps it will even work, but only in conditions of an equal team. In Calltouch, developers have different experiences and areas of responsibility - so they don’t.

Option 5

Everything is clear :)

How it works

In fact, the option I chose by all was “invented” from my previous work, and it really worked. Why "invented" in quotes? Despite the fact that it was in this form, as we used in Calltouch, it never came across to me, I am far from the thought that I introduced something new. Rather, it is a mix of approaches that have been read and taken part in different companies.

So, at the beginning of the reporting period, we define a set of evaluation criteria. Further, at all stages - every day, every hour, the merits of employees in each direction are recorded.

An abstract example, two employees — Ivanov and Petrov, and a pool of planned criteria:


Closing projects is a piece of the second option. Participation in completed projects, the format of this participation, etc. are evaluated here.
Current tasks - work on current tasks, involvement (conditionally subjective indicator), timing, reaction to blockers, etc.
Initiative / ideas - everything seems clear too: the proposed ideas / features / improvements and their implementation.
Closing sprints - on time, with proper quality (no errors or the minimum allowable number, fully functional functionality).
Bugs / code quality is an obvious thing, but it already works in the negative.
Lateness, absenteeism (if relevant) - we fix in the last paragraph, also in the minus.

According to the merits of each is constantly fixing activities. The level of assessment allows you to take into account the contribution to the common cause, roughly speaking, the button made is worth one point, the form made is three, and weight affects the total point, allowing you to select the most and least significant areas.


According to the results of the reporting period (Q2 - the second quarter), we get the sum of points multiplied by the weight for each employee.

What to do next? This is a field for experimentation: we received a certain result of the contribution of each in abstract points.

The simplest option for disposing of these points, which was adopted, is the calculation of the premium, based on the total premium budget using the simple formula

$$

$$bonus = salary * persCoeff * xLimit$$

$$$bonus$- bonus amount
$$$salary$- employee's salary
$$$persCoeff$- personal ratio = (total points) / (average score for the department)
$$$xLimit$- the coefficient that does not give “fly out” for the budget, i.e. $$$xLimit * (salary1 * persCoeff1 + salary2 * persCoeff2 + ...) <= budget$

Total, for example above:
Ivanov - 11 points
Petrov - 8 points
The average score is (11 + 8) / 2 = 9.5

Case 1

Ivanov ZP = 100
Petrov ZP = 100
Budget = 10
The Ivanov Prize = 100 * (11 / 9.5) * 0.05 = 5.8
Prize Petrov = 100 * (8 / 9.5) * 0.05 = 4.2

Case 2

Ivanov ZP = 100
Petrov ZP = 50
Budget = 10
Ivanov Prize = 100 * (11 / 9.5) * 0.063 = 7.3
Petrov Prize = 50 * (8 / 9.5) * 0.063 = 2.6

What are the conclusions?

Of course, this approach has pros and cons (and its difficulties).

pros

The approach is quite simple to use, understandable to all, statistics are available to everyone at any time. Everyone can discuss the controversial moments of “on the fly”, remind about some merit of their own - the manager may miss something.
You can choose any options and number of criteria, before each new quarter –– to change the criteria, their weights, thereby focusing the unit’s attention on weaker points. If everything is good with sprints, you can put the minimum weight or remove it altogether. And vice versa, if you need to tighten this moment, you can extend the criterion to the top.
There is a field for experiments. For example, you can use the average score not by department, but by the results of previous periods of each employee, thus leading some analytics and dependence on past merit. You can use the overall average score of previous periods: if in the current one it has dropped significantly - this is a reason not to bail out the entire bonus budget, making it clear to the team that they have relaxed. Or vice versa, with its constant growth - an excuse to go to the leadership and ask for an increase in the budget.

Cons and difficulties

The main disadvantage is the presence of a share of the manager’s subjectivity. This moment can be partially leveled by the level of assessment. If there are concerns about bias, you can everywhere take the level of assessment “one” and record only the facts. If there are no such concerns, the range can be stretched by measuring the contribution of each specific employee’s achievement.
A very important point is the assessment of junior staff compared to professionals. The level of achievement of people with different experiences is different, but the next victory of each should be recorded. On the other hand, their contribution to the business will not be equal, therefore the level of wages appears in the calculations of the final premium.
The difficulty lies in the fact that the manager must continuously evaluate and record the results of employees, not to forget and not to score. But this is his official duties.