I agree it’s super unintuitive. I was very skeptical myself. We had the confidence to enact this policy because (a) our salaries had been uniformly low since we began in 2018, and motivation, talent density and retention were strong, and (b) our staff salary preference survey and intell from potential hires we lost due to salary suggested that this policy would result in modest increases in costs but substantive improvements in staff retention, hiring and wellbeing. The policy is live and (c) so far so good! Maybe things will change, but so far, seemingly the decades of research and experience about motivation in general aren’t the best model of motivation amongst AIM’s current and target staff.
I agree it’s super unintuitive. I was very skeptical myself. We had the confidence to enact this policy because (a) our salaries had been uniformly low since we began in 2018, and motivation, talent density and retention were strong, and (b) our staff salary preference survey and intell from potential hires we lost due to salary suggested that this policy would result in modest increases in costs but substantive improvements in staff retention, hiring and wellbeing. The policy is live and (c) so far so good! Maybe things will change, but so far, seemingly the decades of research and experience about motivation in general aren’t the best model of motivation amongst AIM’s current and target staff.
I have to agree that the motivation and talent of AIM staff is pretty unique!