Compensation And Benefits Planning

Most AEs think the fastest path to $500K/yr is mastering closing. It’s not. The #1 factor that determines if you’ll ever see that kind of money? Your comp plan. Here’s a breakdown of what a “good” comp plan looks like: I’ve coached thousands of sellers. I’ve seen every comp plan under the sun. And here’s the truth: making $500K–$1M in tech sales isn’t just about hustle, mindset, or skill. It’s about driving the right vehicle. If you’re trying to win a Formula 1 race in a Prius, it doesn’t matter how great of a driver you are. Same with sales. You need the right plan, the right OTE, the right accelerators. Here’s the breakdown of what “good” looks like: 1. OTE (On Target Earnings). SMB → $100K–$150K Mid-Market → $150K–$200K Commercial → $200K–$250K Enterprise → $250K–$350K Strategic → $350K+ (yes, I’ve seen $400K OTEs) A healthy split is 50/50 base and variable. If you’re $200K OTE, $100K should be salary, $100K commission. 2. Quota to OTE ratio. This is EVERYTHING. Good comp plans follow the “6x rule.” Your quota should be ~6x your OTE. $150K OTE? Quota ~ $900K. $300K OTE? Quota ~ $1.8M. If you’re staring at a $200K OTE with a $2M quota… you’re underpaid. Period. 3. Commission percentage. Here’s how you know if your plan is good: Variable ÷ Quota = Commission %. 10%+? Solid. 5%? You’re basically working twice as hard for the same money. 4. Accelerators. This is where reps get rich. Great plans pay more the further you blow past quota: 100–150% = 1.5x 150–200% = 2x 200%+ = 2.5x Do the math: An Enterprise AE with a $300K OTE, $1.5M quota, and strong accelerators can hit $900K+ by getting to 300% of plan. That’s not a pipe dream. That’s how you turn a $300K “job” into a $1M “career.” TAKEAWAY Stop blaming yourself when you’re stuck at $150K. Sometimes it’s not you—it’s the plan. Top earners don’t just sell better. They pick the right vehicle, with the right comp plan, and then step on the gas. Choose wisely. Because the wrong comp plan = capped potential. The right comp plan = $500K+ career. Your plan matters. A lot.

Our latest State of Global Compensation Report - featuring equity insight from our partners Carta - just dropped, and this one is led by Jessica, Deel’s own Head of Global Compensation. Jess shapes Deel’s comp strategy and has been foundational to how we think about fairness and competitiveness across 150+ countries. This new edition gives HR and comp leaders real, actionable insights on how to navigate a fast-changing pay landscape. Highlights: - Equity is going global. With Carta’s data, we’re seeing ownership become a powerful way to build wealth and alignment across borders, especially in Brazil and India. - AI and tech roles are redefining pay norms. Specialized talent is commanding 20–25% premiums, pushing teams to rethink comp structures. - Gender pay gaps persist, but are progressing in countries like Brazil and Colombia shows what’s possible with transparency and intentional hiring. - Contractor markets are maturing. Countries like Argentina and Mexico are thriving hubs for flexible, high-skill talent. If you’re building or scaling a global team, Jessica’s insights offer a practical roadmap for fair, data-driven compensation design. Read on 👉 https://lnkd.in/dtmXytds

In Q1 2025, LTI (Ongoing Equity) Programs Had 4x the “Pay for Performance” Differentiation for Promoted Employees Vs. Salary Raises Companies generally reward top performers through three types of compensation programs: [A] Salary Raises [B] Long Term Incentives (LTI)–often ongoing equity grants [C] Short Term Incentives (STI)–often called a bonus program Today, let’s compare how much differentiation there is across the market for top performers between [A] and [B]. ________________ 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆: We recently took a look at Q1 2025 merit cycle data across 46k+ employees from Pave's dataset. 1st, our data science team grouped and analyzed employees across four groups:  • [1] Promoted  • [2] Above expectations (no promo)  • [3] Meets Expectations or equivalent (no promo)  • [4] Below Expectations (no promo) 2nd, our data science team looked at two dimensions across salary and ongoing equity grants  • [1] What % of employees received a compensation update?  • [2] For those who received, what was the size of the increase? Note that for equity, this was measured by the % increase in net equity value compensation vesting over the next 12 months 3rd, our data science team multiplied “participation” with “amount” to find the “𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲” as a method of measuring pay for performance. ________________ The Results: ✅ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗱  => Salary: +9.7% expected value increase => Ongoing Equity: +38.6% expected value increase ✅ 𝗔𝗯𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 (𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼)  => Salary: +4.5% => Ongoing Equity: +11.0% ✅ 𝗠𝗲𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗿 𝗘𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘁 (𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼)  => Salary: +3.1% => Ongoing Equity: +3.8% ✅ 𝗕𝗲𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 (𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼)  => Salary: +0.3% => Ongoing Equity: +0.0% expected value increase ________________ 𝗠𝘆 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀: 1️⃣ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮 𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝟯𝟴.𝟲% “𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲” 𝘃𝘀 𝗮 𝟵.𝟳% 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲. This means that for promoted employees, the equity comp is ~4x as outsized from a pay for performance standpoint. 2️⃣ 𝗠𝗲𝗮𝗻𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 “𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀” (𝟯.𝟴%) 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀 (𝟯.𝟭%) 𝗳𝗼𝗿 “𝗺𝗲𝗲𝘁 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀” 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲𝘀. This suggests that the real LTI/ongoing equity comp differentiation is happening for top performers (both those in the “promoted” and “above expectations (no promo)” buckets. ________________ 𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 & 𝗛𝗥 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀: Analyze your company’s “expected value” salary and equity raise amounts. How do your outcomes compare to the Q1 2025 benchmarks from this post? And where + how should you consider tweaking your "recommendation logic” to guide your company towards more or less merit cycle differentiation for different cohorts of employees?

Most startups think co-designing compensation means their people will just ask for more money. But here’s the truth: When you give people a seat at the table, they don’t just ask for “more” — they ask for “better”. Co-design isn’t about handing over decision-making — it’s about designing comp with your people, not for them. Companies already do this in other areas: • Product teams co-design with users to build features people actually need. • Marketing teams co-design brand messaging by listening to customer pain points. So why don’t we do this with compensation? 💡 Jessica Z. shared a great approach during a recent FNDN Series interview (releasing soon 😉): Instead of asking what employees want, ask: “What are your biggest challenges with our current compensation stack?” By using this framing, it focuses the user to think about whats not working, instead of just putting together a wish list. Responses might look like the following: “I don’t understand how my equity works" “Our bonus structure feels unpredictable" “I’d rather have a structured promotion path than an ad hoc raise" From there, you have a clear roadmap towards how to improve compensation without putting the focus immediately on salaries. Not only that, co-designing compensation leads to: ✅ A comp package employees actually value. ✅ A system that’s clear, fair, and aligned with business goals. ✅ A culture of trust that reduces frustration and churn. When compensation is a black box, employees assume the worst. When they’re part of the process, they help you build something that works for everyone. How else would you co-design compensation with your people?

𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗳 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝘂𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲 𝗦𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗔𝗜 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 🔥 92% of business leaders say AI investment is a higher priority than employee satisfaction right now and accept higher turnover to fund AI growth. 🚨 We are witnessing one of the most dangerous financial trade-offs in modern business history: funding AI by starving human talent. Everyone is talking about the massive capital required to integrate AI. But where is that money actually coming from? The uncomfortable truth is that companies are pulling it straight out of their people budgets. ⚠️ By the end of this year, 58% of companies will have cut employee compensation, and 54% will have resorted to layoffs just to fund their AI investments. 🚩 This completely explains the frustrating "peanut butter raises" trend we discussed last week. When organizations are actively slashing bonuses (61%), equity (60%), and freezing or reducing raises (59%) to buy enterprise technology, the merit matrix is left completely empty. Some are even cutting core benefits (53%) and base salaries (43%). 🧠 Why is this happening? In a word: Panic. When you look at the drivers behind these cuts, it isn't always calculated strategic planning, according to a new interesting research published by Resume Builder using data 📊 from a survey of 866 U.S. business leaders. ☝️ 𝙈𝙮 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙫𝙞𝙚𝙬: A few days ago, we discussed the frustrating reality of the "peanut butter raise"; those paper-thin salary bumps spread so thinly across the company that they completely fail to reward or retain top talent. Looking at this new study, on corporate AI investments, the root cause of these diluted raises suddenly becomes glaringly obvious. True competitive advantage doesn't come from buying the most expensive AI tools out of fear. It comes from having a highly motivated, well-compensated workforce capable of actually integrating those tools into your daily operations. If you sacrifice your people to buy the tech, you've already lost the race. We can't digitize our way out of bad talent management. The organizations that will actually win this new era are the ones that realize AI is an enabler of human capability, not a replacement for human compensation. Let’s stop spreading the budget so thin and start investing deeply in the actual architects of our future: our people ! 🙏 Thank you Resume Builder researchers team for these insightful findings: Stacie Haller 🔑 How can we win the war for talent if we are actively cannibalizing the exact financial rewards needed to keep our best people? #EmployeeCompensation #EmployeeSatisfaction

Pauline, how to see and compare the whole salary package that’s offered by a potential employer? 🧐 After I posted about average increments in salary negotiations, someone on my LinkedIn asked me about this. So today, let’s go a bit technical ya? Usually, I use an excel spreadsheet to list everything down for my candidates. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝟏: 𝐋𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐠𝐞 In the spreadsheet, I usually create a column for the current package and another for the new offer. You can start by listing the basic salary as this is the core part of any package. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝟐: 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐟𝐢𝐱𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 Remember, basic salary is not everything. Add any other fixed allowance like transport, handphone, meal, or any other fixed allowances for both the current salary and new offer. These can make a different in the total pacakge. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝟑: 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐏𝐅 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐫 Take note of guaranteed bonus (13-month salary / contractual bonus) and the EPF contributions from the employer. Some employer contribute more than the standard rate, which is important to consider as it’s part of your guaranteed income. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝟒: 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐆𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 After listing all the components, total them up to get the Guaranteed Income for both the current package and the new offer. This will give you a clear idea of what you’re guaranteed to receive. You can also calculate the percentage of increment here. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝟓: 𝐃𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 Performance bonus is important too. Some companies’ average performance bonuses pay out is 3-4 months, some 2-3 months, and others average 1 month. So, you may want to take this into consideration. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝟔: 𝐅𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐭𝐬 Remember to include additional benefits such as annual leave, insurance, outpatient benefits, etc. These non-monetary benefits are important to understand the full value of the offer This is the formula for Percentrage of Increment:
 [(𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑁𝑒𝑤 𝑂𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟 (𝑅𝑀) - 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐶𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑎𝑘𝑔𝑒 (𝑅𝑀)) / 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐶𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑎𝑔𝑒 (𝑅𝑀)] 𝑥 100% You’ll see the differences between the current and new packages clearly displayed in the final column, and this will help you make an informed decision based on the Total Gross Annual Income and other benefits offered. It may look a bit leceh to put it all down, but trust me, once you see the numbers, it’ll be easier to decide if the offer is really worth it. Happy analyzing! Remember, the numbers speak, and they can make all the difference in your next career move! 🤗 🌟 Pauline Cheang from Carli Resources #salarynegotiation #careertips #joboffer #careeradvice #negotiationtips

Want your AEs to self-source more of their own deals? Below are some incentive ideas. Mostly carrots (but a few sticks 😬). 1. Higher commission for self-sourced deals Increase commission rates for AE-sourced pipeline vs. marketing-sourced or SDR-sourced deals. Example: - Self-Sourced: 12-15% commission - Inbound/SDR-Sourced: 7-10% commission This makes it financially beneficial for AEs to generate their own pipeline. 2. Pipeline sourcing bonus Implement a quarterly bonus tied to AE self-sourced pipeline. Example: - $5K bonus for generating $500K in pipeline. - $10K bonus for generating $1M in pipeline. This rewards consistent outbound activity, not just closed deals. 3. Qualification incentives Pay a partial commission upfront when an AE self-sources and qualifies a deal (even before it closes). Example: - AE gets 1% of pipeline value upon an opportunity reaching a Stage 2 or 3 (e.g., meeting held + qualified). This encourages outbound efforts even if deals take time to close. 4. Minimum prospecting quota (with stick & carrot approach) Require AEs to generate at least X% of their own pipeline (e.g., 30-50%) to unlock accelerators. Example: - If an AE self-sources 40% of pipeline, they get accelerated commission (e.g., 20% higher) on all deals. - If they don’t hit the target, they lose access to accelerators or have reduced OTE. 5. Tiered quota adjustments based on self-sourcing Adjust AE quotas based on their pipeline mix. Example: - AE Sourced 50%+ Pipeline -> Quota stays at $1.2M. - AE Sourced <20% Pipeline -> Quota increases to $1.5M (forcing reliance on inbound/SDR). This naturally pushes AEs to take control of their own pipeline. 6. Team based incentives for sourcing & closing If your model requires AE/SDR collaboration, incentivize AEs to work outbound deals with SDRs. Example: - If an AE sources an opportunity and an SDR books the meeting, both get a shared spiff ($500-1K per deal). This prevents friction over lead ownership and keeps outbound motion strong. 7. SPIFFs for first meetings booked Reward AEs for setting and running their own first meetings. Example: - $250 per AE-booked first meeting (capped at 5 per month). - If they book 10+, they get an extra $1K bonus. This keeps outbound behavior consistent without needing long-term pipeline attribution. 8. “Outbound Multiplier” on larger deals If an AE self-sources a deal above a certain size (e.g., $100K ARR), they get a 1.5-2X multiplier on commission. Example: - $150K inbound deal -> Standard 10% commission = $15K. - $150K AE-sourced deal -> 20% commission = $30K. This drives outbound for higher-quality deals, not just volume. The ideas above aren’t just theory - they’re pulled straight from what’s actually working for the leaders of Sales Assembly member companies who have gone from asking nicely, to actually incentivizing their AEs to drive their own pipeline. You don’t grow a tree by yelling at it. You feed the roots.

A vibrant multiracial democracy is possible in this country and should extend beyond the ballot box into our workplaces. Workers deserve safety and democracy on the job—and collective bargaining is one of the most powerful tools for ensuring that. Collective bargaining is a form of solidarity organizing that workers use to have a stronger voice. Instead of dealing with the boss one-on-one, for example, workers join together to negotiate as a whole. History has shown that there is power in numbers and bargaining with one voice for equitable pay, safer working conditions, and better benefits is more likely to get results. The goal is to get a fair deal for everyone. Collective bargaining helps level the playing field and protect vulnerable workers by addressing pay equity, work-life balance, and anti-discrimination measures. In short, it helps thwart systemic inequities and improve working conditions across the board. But it’s not just workers who benefit. Collective bargaining benefits us ALL. When educators collectively bargain, they have won smaller class sizes for students, better funding for school facilities, updated materials, and supportive services like student counseling. When teachers organize for better working conditions, fair wages, and professional development opportunities, students and the broader community win by benefiting from less teacher turnover, and educators who are likely to feel more motivated and effective when they work in dignified conditions. The same logic applies across sectors. Patients of healthcare providers who collectively bargain benefit from safer staffing levels, which leads to better patient outcomes, reduced medical errors, improved quality of care, expanded healthcare services, and overall patient safety. The ripple-out impacts of collective bargaining don’t stop there. Studies have shown that collective bargaining helps narrow the public-sector pay gap—benefiting workers and the public through the quality of public services. We all benefit when workers are able to negotiate fair wages and dignified conditions. Workers have higher disposable income which helps support local economies. In sectors like public transportation, food and water safety, and emergency services, collective bargaining leads to better service delivery by ensuring workers are well-trained, fairly compensated, and not overworked. Many workers engage in a tactic called “bargaining for the common good”, a strategy to use the power of worker unity to engage in broader advocacy efforts that benefit the public, like pushing for expanded access to public health, quality education, and safety standards. For our democracy, our public good, and our common future, the rights of workers should be defended, strengthened, and expanded.

Global Compensation Is Evolving Fast — Here’s What HR Leaders Need to Know Deel’s new State of Global Compensation Report offers one of the most comprehensive looks at how pay is changing across 150+ countries and 300,000+ worker contracts. 🌎 Key findings: Global leaders remain consistent: Canada, the U.S., and the U.K. continue to offer the highest compensation across roles. Sweden and Norway now rival the U.K. in pay competitiveness. ▪️ AI is redefining pay structures: Just as data science did a decade ago, AI roles are fragmenting into specialized functions — from finance to HR to product. These niche roles now command 20–25% salary premiums above market averages due to scarce benchmarks. ▪️ Inflation is reshaping pay strategies: In regions like Turkey and Argentina, frequent economic changes have led companies to favor one-time cash payments over base pay increases. ▪️ Equity is rising globally: Technical roles, especially in emerging markets like Brazil and India, are seeing a sharp rise in equity-heavy packages. The U.S. still leads in total equity value, but Canada and France are catching up fast. ▪️ AI & ML engineers’ pay is surging: At the 90th percentile, salaries are growing even faster than the median, showing just how intense the talent war has become. 💡 Takeaway for HR leaders: To stay competitive, rethink compensation as a  strategic differentiator—not just a cost. Build flexible, localized pay structures, benchmark globally, and explore equity and one-time incentives to balance financial sustainability with talent attraction. 📊 Read the full report to see how your pay strategy stacks up: https://lnkd.in/e8jhX9K6 #GlobalCompensation #HRLeadership #FutureOfWork #AI #PayEquity #Deel #Carta

As 2025 comp plans are being finalized make sure these non-negotiables are included. ·     Simple: You shouldn’t need a physics degree from Stanford to figure out how much you’ll be paid at the end of the quarter. ·     Measurable: Reps should be able to calculate their commissions down to the penny at any point during the quarter. There shouldn’t be any surprises when they get their check. ·     Flexible: The plan must accommodate unanticipated events. ·     Profitable: The financial needs of the salespeople and company must be met. Reps should be rewarded, but not at the expense of profit margins. ·     Motivating: There must be meaningful accelerators to reward top performers and decelerators to create pain for missing goals. ·     Thoughtful: Reps will do exactly what the plan tells them to do. Be careful about the goals you set so you’re not surprised by the results. ·     Uncapped: Enough said! A good comp plan will simplify a sales leader’s job by articulating company priorities and goals and rewarding behaviors that support them. A poor plan will result in an unmotivated, internally focused team that could spiral into turnover. You need to get this right if you want any chance for success in 2025. Did I miss anything? I’d love to hear your thoughts.