SCENARIO 2 – Unit 3

The Ashley Cooper Search Agency (ACSA) specialises in finding top-class

properties for wealthy clients from all over the world. Its London office finds
properties in the UK, France and Germany for its clients. It has six relationship
consultants who are multilingual.

At present, relationship consultants are paid a salary, depending on their length

of service, and an end-of-year bonus. The company is reviewing the payment
system. The management is likely to cancel the bonus and adjust the salaries
of the consultants.
Hold a meeting with people in the HR department to discuss if the payment
system should be changed.

Script:
PART 1: DEBATE

Turn 1

Chairperson (HR Manager):

Good morning, everyone. Today, we are discussing proposed changes to the
compensation system for our relationship consultants. The current system
consists of a base salary determined by length of service and an annual
bonus. The management is proposing to eliminate the bonus and adjust the
base salary instead. Let’s discuss both sides of the argument.

Supporter 1:
“I think it is necessary to change the payment system and the first thing to do
is to abolish bonuses. Many employees consider bonuses as a guaranteed
part of their income, but in fact, it depends on the company's performance.
This can create uncertainty, which affects employees' income and makes them
lose their desire to contribute.”
Opponent 1:
“Sorry, but bonuses are the motivation for employees to perform at their best.
Eliminating bonuses can reduce employee motivation, especially for high-
performing employees. Not only that, bonuses are the best way to retain high-
performing employees.”
Supporter 1:
“But if there is too much difference in income due to bonuses in a group, it
will definitely cause conflicts in the company. Makes the company
environment less attractive and leads to mass employee departures,
including good employees”.
Supporter 2:
“Moreover, instead of focusing too much on bonuses, we should focus on
increasing basic salaries and benefits such as training and health care to
help employees feel satisfied and stay with the company for a long time. This
builds loyalty and increases work performance.”
Opponent 2:
“Although non-financial benefits are important, bonuses are an indispensable
factor to maintain motivation and attract talent. Competitors in the
industry such as Maison Office and CBRE Group still use huge bonuses to
compete and retain good employees”
Supporter 1:
“I understand, but we need a big change to move towards a new era of
development for the company. Bonuses are important but they must be
changed to suit the company and the best way to eliminate annual bonuses,
consider quarterly bonuses based on individual performance, which helps
reward fairly, predictably and is less dependent on company performance.”

__________________________________________

Turn 2
Chairperson (HR Manager):

“So what about those who oppose, please tell me your views on this issue.”

Opponent 1:
“Salary and bonuses are two different concepts. Salary is payment for equal
contribution, while bonuses are incentives for outstanding efforts.
Combining them will be unfair, causing hard-working people to be
disadvantaged. A wrong decision can cause a crisis for the company. We
need to find ways to develop the company instead of abolishing bonuses.”

Supporter 1:
“If we don’t try, how will we know it is wrong. Eliminating bonuses and
increasing salaries is an equal distribution for the efforts and cooperation of
the staff. Everyone gets the same salary because they have worked together
for the company and no one will be jealous of each other.”

Opponent 2:
“Equal salary does not reflect each person’s ability. Good people will not be
satisfied when receiving the same salary as those who do not work hard.
There was an experiment with a class that divided the average score for all
students, causing the average score of the class, which was already very high,
to plummet because the good people no longer tried hard and the weak
people became lazy, relying on the contributions of others. If bonuses are
abolished, our company will become that class.”

Opponent 1:
“Moreover, keeping bonuses helps encourage weak employees to learn and
improve from better people, at the same time promoting cooperation and
motivating employees to achieve better results.”

Supporter 2:
“The current bonus system encourages unhealthy competition, causing
employees to focus on individual performance instead of the common goal.
Good people may be reluctant to share their experiences because they fear
that others will take their rewards.”

Opponent 2:
“We can solve the problem you raised by giving rewards based on
performance, everyone will get a reward if they do exactly what we set out.
We can make the bonus a motivation for the company’s efforts, not just for
the best individuals.”

Chairperson:
Thank you for your thoughtful arguments. After considering both sides, let me
briefly summarize the key points presented by both supporters and opponents:
Supporters' Key Points:
1. Bonuses as Motivators: Bonuses are critical for driving performance,
especially for top performers, and serve as both an incentive and a reward.
 2. Performance-Based Bonuses: Introducing performance-based bonuses
could retain the motivational benefits while addressing unpredictability.
3. Team Collaboration Through Linked Bonuses: Linking bonuses to
team achievements can encourage a balance between individual
excellence and teamwork.
Opponents' Key Points:
1. Instability of Bonuses: Relying on bonuses can create financial
insecurity for employees; increasing base salaries offers more stability.
2. Sustainable Satisfaction with Higher Base Salaries: Non-financial
benefits combined with increased base salaries can provide long-term job
satisfaction and engagement.
3. Potential Disruption: Changing the current system could alienate
employees accustomed to annual bonuses and may lead to dissatisfaction.
After considering these perspectives, the final decision is as follows:
1. Bonuses will remain but will be restructured to include both
individual and team performance, potentially on a quarterly or
project basis.
2. Base salaries will increase slightly to provide greater income stability.
3. Non-financial benefits such as training, wellness programs, and extra
leave will be introduced to create a more comprehensive compensation
package.
Let us all work together to implement these changes smoothly and ensure the
continued growth and success of our team.

PART 2: Q&A AND CLARIFICATIONS

TURN 1
Chairperson:
Let’s now address any questions or concerns you may have regarding the
proposed changes.

Supporter 1:
Question: How will salary adjustments be calculated? Will they be uniform
across all consultants, or based on individual factors?
Chairperson:
The adjustments will vary. They will consider factors such as current salaries,
length of service, and past performance. This ensures fairness, rewarding
consistent performers and acknowledging their contributions.
Supporter 2:
Question: What about new employees? Will they be at a disadvantage compared
to longer-serving employees?
Chairperson:
New consultants will also see salary adjustments, but their increases will be
proportionate to their time with the company. We will ensure that their pay is
competitive with industry standards.
TURN 2
Chairperson:
Question: How will performance be measured accurately, especially
considering that different clients and projects may have varying levels of
difficulty?
Opposition 1:
We’ll use a multi-faceted evaluation system that incorporates both quantitative
metrics—such as revenue generated—and qualitative feedback from clients and
peers. We’ll also account for project complexity and adjust evaluations
accordingly.

Chairperson:
Question: Can you give more details on the non-financial benefits, and when
will they be available?
Supporter 1:
We are looking at introducing expanded training programs, mental health
support, wellness initiatives, and additional paid leave. These will be rolled
out gradually over the next six months, with some initiatives, like online training
courses, available sooner.

Chairperson:
Question: If employees are unhappy with the new system, will there be a
chance to revise it later?
Opposition 2:
Yes, we will review the system six months after implementation. Employee
feedback will be gathered through surveys and focus groups, and any
necessary adjustments will be made to ensure the system benefits both the
employees and the company.

Chairperson:
If there are no more questions, we will proceed with finalizing the proposal.
Does it sound acceptable ?
Everyone: yes Chair
Chairperson:
Thank you for your valuable input. This discussion will help ensure the changes
are implemented effectively. Meeting adjourned.