Most merit cycles look cleaner on paper than they do in practice.
The timeline slips. Managers rate everyone highly. Someone who deserves a raise is already at the top of their band. The calibration session surfaces inconsistencies you didn't anticipate. And then you're sitting across from someone explaining why their increase was lower than they expected.
Ekaterina and Daniela have both been through it – in different environments, with different challenges, but a lot of the same moments.
At commercetools, it took three cycles to get all managers genuinely involved in compensation planning. At Aeven, scaling the process across four countries meant dealing with headquarters resistance and managers who were making too many adjustments outside the provided range.
This session is a retro, not a best-practice walkthrough. They'll cover:
- The calibration problem: inconsistency, high raters, and the gap between how the process was designed and how it ran
- Translating ratings into numbers: discretion, matrices, and what to do when the right person is already at the top of their band
- The conversations that don't go well: communicating a low increase and equipping managers for a conversation they're not confident having
- What they'd do differently: the things they're already changing for next cycle
As always, there will be plenty of opportunity to ask questions, share experiences, and learn from fellow reward professionals who are navigating the same challenges.