Pay the person, not the job

Paying the person means that a company pays for skills an employee possesses and may use: in the Future, but does not currently use as a part of his or her daily tasks. Employees who have a variety of skills cost more money in the short run, but the investment pays off when a company needs to hire fewer people or the company's employees make better decisions. The ability to acquire different types of skills is a skill in itself. HR professionals who want to hire applicants with that ability should look at a candidate's past history. Has he or she demonstrated a talent for learning new skills and a desire to seek new knowledge? As part of the selection process, candidates should be told that their daily tasks may not end up fitting their job description. Lawler prefers the term person description, which describes both the tasks to be performed and the skills needed to perform them. Organizations trying to determine the value of an employee's skill set will often find that people tend to inflate their value by judging the skills they already have to be most important to the organization. Exceptions to that rule, people who believe they an overpaid and thus will get fired or laid off, are said to suffer from the Imposter Syndrome. Managers can't always judge in advance which skill sets will be important in the future. Playing catch up may not be a disadvantage: In that situation, employees may be more motivated to add skills when there's a "sense of discomfort." If an employee doesn't want to add new skills, he or she may need to leave the organization. Some companies state in their contracts that employment depends on the ability to change and adapt. An employee with more skills will be more attractive to other companies, but often an organization develops in an employee a blend of skills unique to a particular job.