Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="brownIEman" data-source="post: 3342127" data-attributes="member: 14596">I agree.&nbsp; I once asked a district controller what percentage of pretax profit the revised MIP cost amounted to, was it more or less than 15%, and by how much?&nbsp; He gave me a pathetic side step about how there was no way to know without knowing every management persons salary in the company.Thanks for clarifying.&nbsp; I kind of thought that [USER=11234]@dudebro[/USER] was translating an mip of 3.15 in the old system as 315% in the new.&nbsp; Under the newer system a 100% MIP equates roughly to a 2.0 MIP of old.&nbsp; So a 3.15 today would be called 157.5%.&nbsp; I don&#039;t think anyone is ever going to see that again.&nbsp; The average the last few years I was in was about 70%, or 1.4.&nbsp; And almost every year we missed most of the BS metrics, but had great profitability, so the management committee gave that 1.4 as a &quot;gift&quot; for hard work despite the scorecard saying it should have been lower.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="brownIEman, post: 3342127, member: 14596"] I agree. I once asked a district controller what percentage of pretax profit the revised MIP cost amounted to, was it more or less than 15%, and by how much? He gave me a pathetic side step about how there was no way to know without knowing every management persons salary in the company. Thanks for clarifying. I kind of thought that [USER=11234]@dudebro[/USER] was translating an mip of 3.15 in the old system as 315% in the new. Under the newer system a 100% MIP equates roughly to a 2.0 MIP of old. So a 3.15 today would be called 157.5%. I don't think anyone is ever going to see that again. The average the last few years I was in was about 70%, or 1.4. And almost every year we missed most of the BS metrics, but had great profitability, so the management committee gave that 1.4 as a "gift" for hard work despite the scorecard saying it should have been lower. [/QUOTE]

Verification