To be honest, I don’t think that sounds like a good idea. On the other hand, it might make sense to release a plan of how you’d spend more funding to staff which would include how you might increase compensation based on funding.
I guess when I think about existing charities a lot of them have these perverse incentives to do things to get funding, rather than fix the problem, even without these bonuses.
On the other hand, I’m keen to see staff paid fairly and I think people are more likely to think of working somewhere longterm if they see that there’s a possibility of this.
To be honest, I don’t think that sounds like a good idea. On the other hand, it might make sense to release a plan of how you’d spend more funding to staff which would include how you might increase compensation based on funding.
I’ve left some replies in the discussion here—I’d be interested if you read them and still thought it was a bad idea, and if so, why.
Based on the broadly negative responses to date though, this seems like it might be the most sensible option.
I guess when I think about existing charities a lot of them have these perverse incentives to do things to get funding, rather than fix the problem, even without these bonuses.
On the other hand, I’m keen to see staff paid fairly and I think people are more likely to think of working somewhere longterm if they see that there’s a possibility of this.