Compensation professionals love to throw around the phrase "line of sight", particularly with respect to incentive pay design. What do we mean when we use it in regard to rewards?
And are we using it correctly in understanding reward effectiveness?
Line of sight is an expression with origins in the military. In this context, it means "distance to target". In a reward design scenario, we use it to describe an employee's perceived ability to impact the performance measure(s) on which an award is based.
I think our use of this phrase in rewards often misframes the challenge. Taken too literally, it may propel us on a search for incentive measures that are closer to the immediate confines of an employee's responsibility - when the real question should be centered on how we can help the employee understand the connection between what they do day-to-day and what the organization needs to succeed.
Ultimately, shortening an employee's line of sight is about helping them understand how their work can help move the company performance needle. It's less about finding the right measure than it is about education and coaching. It's about communication.
While this has the obvious implications for making employee incentive plans work, it should take on importance above and beyond rewards. It should be an essential part of what a good first-line manager does in the regular course of things.
Perhaps its time to move that phrase out of the realm of reward lingo and into the general talent management sphere. What are your thoughts?
Creative Commons image "Line of Sight - Cobble Hill, Brooklyn" by Marco
