Is it too odd to work? It’s too early to tell if the program will have a lasting impact on talent acquisition, staff performance or long-term retention. Different has worked well for many companies in the past. It has also failed spectacularly many times. But, fear of the unknown has not scared employees away from work for tons of companies who are at the leading edge of their industry.

As we fly through another holiday season let’s take a look at some of the stockings hanging on the executive compensation mantle. This is the time of year for gifts and coal. Some are based on lists and requirements, others are a tad bit more…discretionary. In the end, like every year, most get something nice, some get more than they deserve, and others finally get a reminder that being bad has a cost.

Pay has been in the news so often lately, it can be hard to choose a topic to write about. But on November 12, 2018, I read an article titled Setting a maximum wage for CEOs would be good for everyone.” The author was Mark Reiff, a person with an impressive academic resume who asks if setting a maximum wage could “be the long-awaited solution to economic inequality?”

I’m not going to bury the lead. The answer is no. No, a maximum wage is not a solution to economic inequality. In fact, it isn’t a solution for anything

I began my compensation career in 1994. People still typed things (on typewriters). Email was a new thing used by only a limited few. Equity compensation was the wild west. It cost companies nothing. It was used as liberally as salt at a corner burger joint. Few companies knew all the rules and fewer followed them. Gains were expected and repricings were performed without much thought. Importantly, equity was used to fill sometimes massive gaps between cash compensation expectations and cash compensation realities. Stock options were a secret weapon of startups and IPOs to asymmetrically compete for talent against the tech titans and other big companies of the day.

Equity is a term that has become a keystone in the world of compensation. We use it in a wide-ranging list of topics including stock-based compensation, pay transparency, gender and race. I recently did a presentation about the topic titled “Three Buzzwords and One Truth. The buzzwords being fairness, transparency, and internal equity, the truth is the continued growth in variable (differentiated) pay.

On October 11, 2018, Uber filed a request (available from Axios) with the SEC to allow these workers to receive pre-IPO equity that is compliant with Rule 701 and allow those equity awards to be registered for post-IPO use and issuance under an S-8 Registration. This would be a fundamental change to equity compensation and change the playing field for companies active in the gig economy.

I recently attended a compensation conference and there was great speaker, Elizabeth Borges of Github, who covered the topic of pay disparity from new angles. She discussed some of the root causes of gender inequity from the perspective of psychology (among other things.) During the Q&A the audience discussed some of their company’s challenges and successes. It was good to see that many companies were taking active roles in addressing historic inequity, but disappointing that most still had issues with avoiding inequity in the future.

The more useful type of tension can be as magical as the tug of a helium balloon on the string in a child’s hand. It can also be equally difficult to control and similarly capable of escape. It can also be as dynamic as launching from a trampoline. Learning to use it properly takes practice, but the results can be pretty impressive. This is the tension that effectively links pay and performance. It is also the tension that links groups, and entire companies, together into a stronger, more cohesive entity.