Is It Fair for Employees to Seek Raises in Small Companies After Gaining Experience?

Hello all,

This is a question that has been nagging in my mind for many months. I tried to find the answer to this question and got some views but not the answer. So, I thought I would share it here to expect some responses from the senior people here.

CASE:

A candidate with good communication and interpersonal skills joins an organization that is developing. When he steps in, he does not have any exposure to the corporate culture and practical knowledge of the work that happens. He was given a chance in this smaller organization. The candidate, being good, picked up the pace in 6 months and got habituated to the people working there, forming a good relationship with everyone. In this process, he was given many responsibilities, and the good part is he accepted them and handled them well. Suddenly, he started feeling that he is being paid less even after holding many responsibilities and thought of changing his job right after six months of joining.

Now, if we think from the organization's point of view, it gave him the opportunity to work and responsibilities to explore things. It should be noted that he might not have learned as much in six months if he had joined another company because big organizations have specialists for every area. In contrast, being a smaller organization, he was given many responsibilities and hence the opportunity to learn more in less time. He has become a key person within a very short span of time. Now, it is a tough time for the organization if he leaves.

The employee knows this and is ready to continue if his salary is revised.

So, is that particular employee taking advantage of the smaller company, or is this what is called professionalism these days?

The reason for the above case is smaller organizations cannot afford backups for employees as big MNCs do. It does not make much difference if a person leaves an MNC. Whereas, if a well-settled person resigns from a smaller organization, it has an effect.

What can be done from HR's point of view to avoid these kinds of situations?

This is something I have noticed myself and have also heard about from many others.

Please do comment with your valuable opinions.

Thanks & Regards,

Kiran.

Dear Kiran,

I agree with your point completely. Many employees do this, and we also face similar situations regularly. The sense of professional responsibility towards an organization is not available anymore. Employees don't care much for the organization that has given them a break. They feel that they have learned everything there is to learn in that short span, not realizing experience is gained over the years, not in days or months.

It is a sorry state considering the fact that all employees are today looking at the monetary gain rather than the knowledge they will earn, also forgetting the accelerated growth pattern they can achieve in a small company. It is really sad, and we as HR professionals are also not helping the fact that we are also creating a huge demand for younger generation employees with minimum skills to join us.

Praveen

Hi KIran,

I think the employee is not doing anything wrong. I agree the organization gave him a break and an opportunity. But the candidate is good enough to handle the challenges, and he has handled his responsibilities very well. Then why shouldn't he deserve enough compensation for his responsibilities? He should get compensation equal to what your organization is paying any professional doing the same job. Think in another manner; will you pay more than expected to a fresh candidate?

If an employee is asking for more than the company norms for a particular job, considering roles and responsibilities, then his demand should not be accepted because you can lose one employee, but for one employee, you cannot lose four other people.

Rahul

This problem seems to be universal, and it is not only from the part of employees but the management is equally responsible for such an unhealthy atmosphere. Generally, pay and perks are decided based on experience and mostly age, and not on the roles and responsibilities. Even performance has very little impact on the two, and it is prejudiced that a young employee is to be paid less than a senior or older employee in the same cadre, regardless of qualification and performance.

We have to leave unhealthy dogmas of the past and adopt a new approach to management. If an employee is willing to take up added roles and responsibilities, it is to benefit more of himself along with the organization. You cannot expect one to think about the organization without the organization thinking about him. Well, if an employee is capable and performing, he should be rewarded accordingly, and he should not have to beg for the same.

Adopt a scientific approach for promotions and increments, and this shall ensure that the deserving are rewarded, and military rule is not followed.

Best of luck.

Hi Kiran,

I completely agree with you. I think the average lifespan of a software professional in a company is anywhere between 12-18 months. Even if we offer the salary as per the industry norms, people still look for a job change, citing various reasons like career growth. Could anyone tell me what retention strategy should be followed to retain people?

Radha

Thank you, Praveen, Aby, Rahul, and Radha for your valuable opinions.

Now, Rahul,

A company cannot hike its salary to higher extents unless the case is genuine. The reason being, management has to maintain the balance between newcomers and existing manpower. Rahul, if this employee's salary is hiked, he reaches the level of some employees who have been working with the company and have been loyal to the company for say 1-1.5 years. So, now this group gets demotivated by this act of management. So, what should the management do? Should it value this new joiner or give value to its loyal employees? From the management's point of view, both are equally important and neither can be lost. I was expecting a solution considering this point.

Aby,

Simply put, your suggestion was awesome. However, don't you think you might lose some employees if you adopt this in your organization, even though it is useful in terms of long-term plans? I mean to ask, do you think it is easy to implement this in any form of organization?

If your answer is "YES," please explain how to proceed with the implementation without the organization suffering much or the employees being affected.

Please share your opinions.

Thanks & Regards,

Kiran.

Let me rephrase what you are saying,
This is a Regular Scenario in a Smaller Organization and it's a “Monster Created”
Now imagine this, You Join a Smaller Organization and because you “Sounded” better then the rest you were given a Lead Role in the cage at the same pay, To make it simple
You Joined a Company as an Executive and Because you were better then the rest (One eyed man in the Land of Blind :-) ) you were called a Manager and given all the responsibility, Now you carried it on your shoulders (Not Knowing how to do it, mind it)
And you “consider” Your self a manager now coz you have done it for like 6 months,
Now, a manager with a Bigger Organization is paid 5-6 times more and hear is where our Make shift manager stands, now who Created this Situation?

Hi Kiran,

It's indeed an interesting case study.

Let's see if we can be fair both to the company as well as to the individual.

Full marks to this gentleman, as he has displayed initiative, put in extra effort to enhance his skills, undertaken various responsibilities, and discharged them well. His primary need when he joined the company obviously was to enhance his capabilities through hands-on exposure. He met that objective, and as a natural outcome, his value has gone up, and he's in a position now to command the same.

The company, on the other hand, has been open in terms of giving more responsibilities to him. If this person is delivering higher value, the organization should then reciprocate by enhancing his remuneration and benefits. Of course, each organization has to play within certain boundaries, and employees are aware of them.

A job in an organization is ultimately a package consisting of remuneration, intrinsic job challenge, learning opportunities, work culture, etc. Organizations and employees have to keep looking at maintaining a dynamic balance of these factors.

On the organization's part, it could do the following:

- Enhance his remuneration and benefits

- Show him a long-term career path

- Have an honest dialogue on pluses and minuses of building a career with the organization

- Help him introspect on what his career drivers are and if this organization can meet those expectations at that stage

When he joined the company, both time, context, and place were mutually complementing. Now the balance has changed, and it needs to be seen in a fresh context.

If that employee sees a reason/sense in continuing, he would do so.

If not, it's better to let him go.

There are instances wherein individuals go to bigger brands, get paid much higher for much smaller or restricted jobs, get fed up after a while, and then either come back or make another career shift with more awareness of what their career drivers are at that stage.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,
Rajesh

Dear Kiran,

Hi! Thanks for your recognition. While ensuring that the new and young efficient employee is suitably rewarded, and in the absence of an existing system of performance appraisals, the higher management should always be kept aware of such progressive efforts by the employee. It should be the management who awards this employee certain remuneration, making him a role model for others rather than a target of jealousy, facing suppression from so-called seniors. This recognition should have been given prior to the employee's disclosure of resignation. Surrendering to him now could lead to unhealthy practices by other efficient employees. It would have been more appropriate to reward him rather than surrender. A stitch in time saves nine.

Anyhow, you can now initiate the process of fake appraisals only among the higher management. Avoid involving functional managers if possible. Consider giving raises to at least 2% of your total manpower, including troublemakers if any (from the union's point of view). In the long run, this approach shall motivate others to perform better and set standards for regular performance appraisals.

Best of luck!

Hi Kiran,

Nice case, thank you and thanks to all other contributors. All the ideas sounded interesting when handled individually.

I have a different argument on this. Let's looking at this from an economic perspective. In economics we have 2 types of markets one is the Goods market and other is the Factor market.

• Goods: here all the goods of or services of the organizations are traded.

• Factor markets: here the factors of production Land, Labor and Money are traded.

Now let's think how many times had we realized that HR person is a sales man in the factor market. Are we good at sales. Do we understand the market properly. Had we understood that then we wouldn't have discussed this issue so long… goods are traded at the best price so would be talent and skills.. more so when there is a scarcity of talent.

Let's understand organizations are not doing charity by giving opportunities to freshers. They are only gaining on the opportunity to mould people according to their requirements. The secret of selling is in the strength of the product/service and the skill of the sales man.

Saying that how many times are we sure that we have recruited the person who is the right fit culturally for our organization. Lets try this exercise out in our organizations. Ask the entire HR team to define the culture of the organization and you would be startled to see the results. Run this exercise on the different business units and you would be shocked with the results.

Now run the test on the sales team of your organization and ask them to define their product/service and see the results.. you would be see a great deal of uniformity.

The point I am trying to stress is that its time we change our outlook towards talent. The change should start with the belief that we are not opportunity providers, we are opportunity seekers; we need talent to achieve our business objectives.

I certainly feel that the day we start to see our employees as clients and the day we master the skill of Client servicing, that day we are ready to compete in the global factor markets.

Regards

Srikanth Ch

Dear Kiran,

You have definitely touched upon a very prevalent problem in any industry.

But I don't think any company, whether big or small, can take their employees for granted. In the case that you have just spoken about, the company might not have done any succession planning for this particular employee, but it's not unfair for the employee to look for better opportunities if this company can't take care of his economic needs (just like in Maslow's Theory); he obviously will look out.

It is at this point that the company needs to realize the need for replacements and succession planning and take care of it in the future. Though the company may face a setback right now, if they can combat this and avoid this situation in the future, then that small company will very soon be among the big companies.

We may feel bad for the company when we are not the affected employee, but when you think from the employee's point of view, it's not like he is leaving the company because it is small or big; he is leaving because he needs more economic growth, which his present company can't afford right now.

If the company maintains cordial relationships with him, probably they could have him back, and he will be happy to join them again when they are bigger and able to afford him and his growing aspirations.

I myself would not be in a position to continue working in an organization just because I have learned a lot there and I love and am loved by people there if they cannot pay me as per industry standards and give me a platform for my growth aspirations.

Really, a very interesting case.

Thanks,

Shweta

This is really an interesting topic. I have a few comments to make.

A lot of good points have been raised, particularly by Rajesh (RV).

However, one point has been overlooked. The employee joined as a fresher and by dint of his own perseverance and inclination to learn and better himself, has taken up and been granted a lot of new responsibilities and tasks, which it seems he is handling quite well. Suddenly, he is dissatisfied with his emoluments and feels they do not match his current job content. He wants either the company to recognize this and reward him, or else he will look for another opening elsewhere which will pay him better.

Come on, guys, if a fresher joins your organization at a junior position and proves he is better than the others like him because he has used a lot of initiative and has taken up extra responsibilities, you yourselves will not immediately envelop him in a golden cloak. Without any further consideration, either raise his grade or his emoluments!

Instead, you will encourage him with a pat on his back, say his progress is being noted, and that if he keeps it up, his promotional prospects will be excellent.

After all, while his initial spurt is commendable, he has been with the organization only six months, and that is too short a time to judge whether his initiative will be at the same level another six months or even a year down the line. It may even be possible that he will soon reach a plateau of achievement at which time his rate of progress will slow down considerably.

In other words, you will wait and watch his further progress before you take any concrete steps to either promote him or raise his emoluments. But you will, in the meantime, constantly motivate him (see above).

On the other hand, were he to look for employment elsewhere, and you were his prospective employer, would you put so much value on his six months of very good work? Because after all, it is only six months' work, and while a lot of promise is being shown, you do not know for how long that promise will last!

No, you will not. You may certainly take him on at a slightly higher package than what he is currently drawing, but will take your time to appraise him before offering him something better!

Also, if yours is a larger and more professional organization than the one he is currently in now, you will wonder whether he will perform as effectively in such an organization as yours, where his peers will be equally good. After all, as someone already commented, in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. But when the one-eyed man travels to another kingdom where everyone else can see better than him (with two good eyes each), then how good will he be?

So my advice to the youngster would be to stick on at the same emoluments for at least six months to a year more, judge how good you are at the end of that time, and then approach your own management for a jump in emoluments/promotion. If they cannot meet your expectations, try elsewhere. By that time, the new employer will also be able to judge you more equitably, and you will definitely end up with a better deal, either way!

Views, others?

Jeroo

Hi Kiran,

First of all, I agree that the company has given this candidate the needed break to learn and grow in his field. But what's wrong in him asking for more salary when he thinks his potential can earn him a better offer somewhere else? Don't you feel the organization should consider the value of this person and give him an increment? In the end, the organization also benefits from this guy's presence.

I had a similar question to ask. What if the people who own proprietary concerns don't keep promises and, at the time of appraisals, point out your work deficiencies? They are satisfied with the work that you are doing but don't want to give appraisals. While I agree that their objectives and short-term goals for the organization may have changed, they should still respect individuals and understand their problems.

I think people from big or small organizations should at least respect promises, practice good HR policies themselves, and then advocate for them to others.

Regards,

Shiju

Hi Kiran and all,

This is one of the nice discussions I have gone through yet. I am very thankful to you and all responding people for giving me the food for thought.

I also have a little to say.

No doubt the case is universal; rather a fact; happening in every organization, small or big! The only difference is that a small organization is affected more strongly.

In your case, Mr. X (Let's consider this as the name for the employee) joined and now wants to leave within 6 months. XYZ Organization (Let's use this as the company's name) provided him with a chance to showcase his abilities.

From both sides, there is a passion for growth. Both parties seek opportunities to progress. According to SWOT analysis, they each have their own strategies.

Let's consider from the Company's side:

1. They needed a person and thus recruited Mr. X.
2. XYZ assigned various responsibilities to X as he was capable of performing them.

From Mr. X's side:

1. He worked for the company with full loyalty and interest.
2. He managed all the responsibilities given to him with his competency.
3. Though the organization is small, there are other employees as well, but only a few have grown due to XYZ's policies, and X is one of the beneficiaries.

Nowadays, it is clear that there is always a demand for competent people globally. As HR is a strategic partner in business, individuals like X are always in demand. It is not just that X feels underpaid; there are also many attractions from outside that may compel X to leave.

I'll give my practical example. My boss manages me very well. I am a medical doctor working in a placement consultancy. I find my work very interesting, so I pursued an MBA in HR to excel in that field.

I am getting offers ranging from 3.6L - 6.0Lpa with just 1 year of experience and yet to finish my MBA. I am attending a very prestigious institute for my MBA.

My boss has changed my remuneration conditions from a general salary to a consultant and has given me the freedom to choose my work - timings, working hours, accessibility, client base, etc.

This made me realize that I need to work the same way in other organizations as well. If I continue working in this role, I will gain far more.

This is the time when an employee should transition from the status of Mr. X to an emerging partner. If this transition is not facilitated, it is certain that people like X are destined to grow. They will move on.

To retain them, XYZ should change their perspective and see them not just as workers but as business partners.

I believe this is a safer and more appropriate solution. This approach shows the candidates the challenges faced by employers as well.

Regards,

Dr. Manisha

Hi Kiran,

A good case to explore; in my view the company as well as the employee have their faults.

I will explore the organizational aspect in this case.

First of all an organization should have a job description which helps you identify what the employee's tasks should be. Of course multi tasking is healthy if you convey to the employee that this is a requirement in the job; learning to handle all aspects of the organization which is a must in certain organizations.

It is important to understand especially if this particular employee is under probation (Short term as you say) that the company should not stretch the boundaries. If he was granted with a pay hike you can't avoid other requests from similar employees or objections from senior employees which undoubtedly will cause major conflicts.

If I were the HR manager in this particular organization I will “talk” to the employee because I believe communication is the best way to sort out conflicts. It is important to make the employee understand his lack of experience and even if he resigns joining another organization will not be an easy task because his 6 months of work experience will be nothing to brag about.

However to solve the current situation it will be beneficial for both parties to come to a compromise. The organization can promise him a better increment weighing his performance at the end of 01 years time which will not only benefit the employee but the company as well.

Hi Kiran, Srikanth, and all the others who contributed to this case study,

I am Renu, and I find myself in a similar situation. I joined a small company (which is an MNC) more than 3 years ago at a low salary because I wanted to transition from academia to the corporate world. With my ability to take on additional responsibilities and consistent performance, I have proven myself to the senior management. However, I am encountering a common problem - I am more qualified than most individuals who have been with the organization for over 10 years. I am more efficient and have shouldered more roles and responsibilities. While our company typically provides annual increments, and I have consistently received the highest increment each year, my initial low salary has left me significantly behind my peers. Although I received a salary adjustment this year, bringing some improvement, the market rate is double what I currently earn.

I understand the importance of loyalty as an employee. However, in my case, I got married 1.5 years ago in Mumbai, while my company is located in Jaipur. To retain me, they offered the option of working from home and traveling to Jaipur for 7-10 days every month. Despite this arrangement, I find myself constantly traveling and feeling frustrated that I could secure a higher-paying job elsewhere. Additionally, given my diverse skill set, I struggle to choose the right field for my next career move. While I have attended numerous interviews, I suspect that potential employers doubt one person's ability to excel in so many areas in such a short time, particularly in HR.

After dedicating myself to the company, I now face a dilemma - I feel unable to continue with the company, yet I am hesitant to leave it as well.

Do you have any insights or advice on this matter?

Regards,

Renu

Dear Renu,

Please refer to my earlier comments yesterday. I was then referring to a new employee who had barely completed six months with his first employer and was raring to fly higher.

In your case, you have completed three years and have consistently proven yourself by earning high increments and a salary regradation. Your constant travel between Jaipur and Mumbai is proving troublesome, particularly as you are newly married.

It is time now to look for a permanent assignment in Mumbai. You mentioned that the industry benchmark is way above the emoluments you are presently earning. Have you investigated what exactly the industry benchmark is in terms of job performance? Do you have the requisite experience/abilities to justify being given the industry benchmark rank? If you think you do, then look for a position at that level in a multinational or a professional Indian organization. If you lack any experience/exposure, try to obtain this, either on the job or from the net, and try again.

If you do this, I think you will find it smooth sailing.

Jeroo

Hi all,

I want to add one more situation in the original case study. Of course, management should get some time to evaluate the performance of each employee. If we consider a special case of an employee who really raised the bar and performed extremely well in the last six months, then should management consider him/her for a salary revision after six months of his/her services? One thing to clarify is that the company has a policy of salary revision after six months in the case of exceptional performance. Another consideration is that, when comparing with other departments, if the salary paid to a particular employee is significantly lower, should management consider him eligible for a salary hike, or should his reporting person recommend the respective employee for a salary hike to management?

In this case, the employee is in a dilemma. They don't want to quit this job as they are getting good exposure. Of course, when it comes to salary issues, they are not satisfied with the current pay. This dissatisfaction leads to demotivation for the employee, affecting their performance negatively.

Supriya

Hi Renu,

The case is the same with most professionals working in small organizations or start ups.

My observation from the 2 years of experience in Career Counselling is that, the attitudes required to work in a larger organizations are quite different to that required to work for a smaller organization or start ups. To work in a start up needs an attitude to work in uncertainties and chaos. The prime motivating factor would be the ability to juggle around many roles at a single point of time. Money always takes a back seat for these people and they thrive on the chaos. They would love to see their effort giving fruits and the recognition becomes much more important.

On the contrary when you work in large organizations, it the people with the ability to follow a process who survive the best. Every thing is defined here and you will have to only follow the steps in doing the work. It's highly structured and neighbors don't like you poking nose into their work.

Creativity and flexibility depends on the industry you are working for in case of large organizations. It's the lowest in manufacturing and the highest in the education industry.

Therefore all that you will have to choose is what drives you. Is it money or responsibility / independence. Then decide whether the company you are working tpsday suits you or not. Loyalty to a self is important than loyalty to the company. We do no good to the organization we work for by sticking around even when we are sure that its really frustrating being there. It will hurt you and your personal life badly. Always enjoy the work .. that's the way to go!!

Regarding the focus on what roles to apply this is one advantage you have working for a smaller organization where in you can choose what you want to do. I should caution you that its not easy to migrate from a smaller organsation to a larger orgnisation and also in choosing the role. For your experience the culture fit would be critical. Therefore research on a few roles .. talk to friends and understand what it means to work full time in one role…. Basic research will help you understand what suits you best.. nest step would be to customize resume to highlight only those roles which you aspire to crack and live happily ever after enjoying the work life to the fullest!!!

In case you need more help please write to me at [Login to view].

Regards

Srikanth Ch

HI to Every Body,

This case is quite interesting & very important issue too. I would like to share my view point here.

Nothing wrong if an employee search the new job, smaller company can't offer such a salary, though it could understand & properly evaluated the performance,etc. there will have a lot of constrains such as other dept head, senior, turnover of the co. (Expect if this guy is in marketing dept - where can encourage or sustain through incentive - indirectly salary increment which not affect others.)etc. By thinking of loyalty, faithful, whether you want to lose his better future such as salary, good environment, etc. It's not possible in a mechanical & uncertain world. Everyone needs money & wants to settle in their life by buying home, car, etc. at the earliest

If a person doesn't have a skill, can he get such good opportunity, certainly not?

The smaller company gave opportunity to all equally at lower salary, but the employee who has good skills, he earns position, takes more responsibility, etc. If he has satisfied with job, salary then definitely he will work continuously.

Some people has satisfaction on salary, job etc, but he urge/look for to learn something new & work in new environment than the existing environment. or he wants to be equal with others who has same experience,knowledge in the same filed ( since they earn more than him).

So the company can expect only that the concerned employee has to complete the current most important work for that project & he must properly handover his Job*, (even it can get some help/guidelines etc. in future, if it has good relation with that employee). *Still then the company can hold the last month salary, relieving letter, service certificate etc. till the handover charge.

Regards,

Ramyashankar

Hi all,

The response is really good. Different views with solid backup of clarity. Thanks to all for your contribution.

I really liked the opinion of Jeroo. The opinion is balanced.

YES, you should stay with a company for at least 1 year to declare what you are for the company. Here, I would quote that "Standing FIRST in a class of 100 members is an easy job, but maintaining the FIRST RANK is a difficult task for sure." So, stay with the organization for one year, prove yourself and your worth for the organization. Look at your salary, if you think that you are getting the right package, fair enough or else discuss this with the management. If the management thinks that you are the one that organization needs, it would definitely hike your salary. In case the organization does not hike your salary, you can explain to them the reasons after securing a job with a nice package. So, you too would be leaving the organization on good terms that has provided you a break.

Please correct if something seems impractical or contradictory here.

Thanks & Regards,

Kiran.

OK Kiran, I think what you have discussed is a common situation faced by all HR professionals and line managers.

Let us take this from two angles:

1. Company's perspective - which gave a chance anticipating a long-term association with the employee and benefiting from the expertise gained by such a fresher in due course of time.

2. Employee's perspective - Want to rise on the career ladder high ASAP and to be well compensated to have that feel-good feeling and pride in the peer/friends group.

As this is a regular situation in most companies, based on my experience:

1. A performance review after 6 months of joining the organization.

2. Chart a career growth plan after a discussion with the employee and the reporting authority.

3. Link the % achievement of the KRA to the C&B plan.

This judiciously assessed performance will help both parties to analyze the situation and command accordingly.

If the candidate is fairer in demand, there is no point in losing an experienced candidate who has already gelled up with the culture.

So, we say performance wins.

Hope this helps.

Regards

Hi Kiran,

All the MNCs these days are rewarding employees based on their performance. Any employee who works would expect something from the employer at the end of the day. It would be a very good learning experience for the employee, but when you see it from the perspective of the employee, he would finally see what he has gained from the hard work he has done. When he works with so much dedication, he would expect something that would really motivate him.

I agree that the employer has given him a good chance to grow, but it depends purely on the employee's performance. So, I would say that even if the employer doesn't raise his salary, they should at least acknowledge his achievements.

Hello all,

This is a question that has been nagging at me for quite a few months. I tried to find an answer to this question and got some views but not the answer. So, I thought I would share it here to expect some responses from the senior people here.

CASE:

A candidate with good communication and interpersonal skills joins an organization that is developing. When he stepped in, he did not have any exposure to the corporate culture and practical knowledge of the work that happens. He was given a chance in this smaller organization. Being good, he picked up the pace in 6 months, got habituated to the people working there, and shared a very good relationship with everyone. In this process, he was given many responsibilities, and the good part is he accepted them and handled them well. Suddenly, he started feeling that he was being paid less even after holding many responsibilities and thought of changing his job right after six months of joining.

Now, thinking from the organization's point of view, it gave him the opportunity to work and explore responsibilities. It should be noted that he might not have learned this much in six months if he had joined another company, as big organizations have specialists for every area. In a smaller organization, he was given many responsibilities and hence the opportunity to learn more in less time. He became a key person within a very short span of time. Now, it is a tough time for the organization if he leaves. The employee knows this and is ready to continue if his salary is revised.

So, is that particular employee taking advantage of the smaller company, or is this what is called professionalism these days? The reason for the above case is smaller organizations cannot afford backups for employees as big MNCs do. It does not make much difference if a person leaves an MNC, whereas if a well-settled person resigns from a smaller organization, it shows its effect.

What can be done from HR's point of view to avoid these kinds of situations?

This is something I have noticed myself and have also heard about from many.

Please comment with your valuable opinions.

Thanks & Regards,
Kiran.

Radha,

I accept your viewpoint. In this particular case, you are thinking only from the viewpoint of this employee. However, as an HR professional, you should consider all perspectives, such as how your decision will affect the existing employees and other factors.

Even if he is performing well, you cannot simply hike his salary to $4000 - $5000, especially after only six months. This action may hurt the feelings of existing employees. By trying to retain him, you might end up losing other valuable and loyal employees.

Therefore, it would be better to wait for 9 months to a year, assess what the organization has to offer, and then make a decision accordingly if the salary increase is not as expected.

At the end of the day, if you are not receiving the right package, there are only two possible reasons. Either you are not the right candidate for the package, or the organization you are working for is incapable of paying you what you deserve.

What do you say?

Well, this is a very interesting case study in itself as I find myself in this situation.

Like one of the members mentioned, most of the big MNCs we know have a specialist in each department to handle any sort of mess. So, it's quite clear that in bigger companies, there's not much an employee can do but stick to his department and work there until and unless he purposely performs below average and moves to a different department (eventually affecting his pocket).

Now, coming to the point where a person is given a chance to work in a smaller organization. Yes! Those guys are giving him a break into the industry, but it's a risk that small companies are taking, hoping that the employee is going to stick to the company and grow. The growth of any employee in any firm, irrespective of it being a big company or a small firm, depends on his efficiency and how hardworking he or she is. Even if a fresher is given a higher responsibility within a short period (say in this case, 6 months), one should remember the company is taking the risk and at the same time trying to check if that employee can handle such a higher job responsibility efficiently and effectively. I am sure all of you are aware that in every organization, the next pay hike is generally given after the first 6 months based on performance to date.

Given such an opportunity to a fresher is a big deal, at least for a small company. It's more or less a calculated risk they take; probably if the fresher can handle the situation, he will either ask for a higher pay even before getting the numbers right or leave the organization. If the person is good at the job, he's basically groomed for the new responsibilities, and please note he cannot expect a huge hike in pay until he has brought a phenomenal business to the company that has a 10% close rate. I hope everybody agrees that all organizations have their own growth structure for all employees, whether they are experienced or freshers. This growth structure is 70% based on performance; the remaining 30% is towards the experience one has and how this experience has helped the company achieve its goals, among a few other factors.

At times, not everybody employed in a small firm performs well, but extra responsibilities are given just to keep that person busy and not to make it feel like his/her job is monotonous. Having said this, even if a senior employee with all the experience hasn't done much to help the company achieve its goals or his team's goals, they will not be rewarded. One way of retaining an employee is either giving him a hike, incentive, holiday packages, or a few coupons. Now, this depends on the organization. It's very hard to retain an employee who has made up his mind to leave the organization just for a few bucks or for a bigger brand name. That's where HR comes in; it's our job to figure out how to get him back. One way is to offer the things I mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph.

For example, each one of us goes shopping, don't we? When we shop, most of us are attracted to big names in the brand industry. Why? We don't know if it's quality, quantity, or simply because we like the brand. Some of us wouldn't mind going into a non-brand shop and picking up something we like just because we like the stuff that vendor has.

Now, one should remember that each individual has his/her choice to make. It depends on what a person is looking for; is it money or are they looking to learn more through experience. Most of us are drawn in by the amenities and facilities a big company offers when compared to a smaller firm where all they can do is pay your salary and give you an option to grow.

Conclusion: Like one of my fellow Hyderabadi friends talked about economics and its comparison to this topic, I would just like to add this sentence, "The human mind is a bundle of desires."

I am a product of a smaller organization. The exposure one gets in a smaller organization is much higher in respect to all sections or departments. The experience one can gain from the small company can be used in the future, as in a smaller company, "YOUR VOICE IS HEARD QUITE CLEARLY AND YOUR SUGGESTIONS" are considered.

It depends from individual to individual whether he wants to stick with a smaller company and grow to help the organization achieve the goals it aims for, and at the same time widen his horizon. I am myself a fresher in one of the small companies, and I have received 2 fantastic promotions in less than a year - one based on my performance and the other just to check if I can handle higher responsibility. I had a colleague who was a senior guy with over 9 years of experience; he left the company just because of the brand name and the money. Now he's back again because his voice wasn't being heard by anybody in his new organization, and his suggestions were taken for granted. At the end of the day, I would like my voice to be heard by everybody and show how my ideas can help me and the company achieve the goals. This is possible in a smaller firm when compared to a bigger firm unless you have an uncle who's the Manager for that area and has a key role in the organization's decision-making.

At least for me, for the moment, I want to learn as much as I can. Most others may not think alike.