Harvard Business Review Case Analysis Prod. #: HR6-PDF-ENG
SAS Institute: A Different Approach to Incentives and People Management Practices in the Software Industry
Case intro:
The SAS Institute is a large, growing software company headquartered in the Research Triangle in North Carolina. Founded more than 25 years ago, it has evolved a unique approach, given its industry, to developing and retaining talent including using no stock options or phantom stock and not paying its salespeople on commission. The CEO and Vice President of Human Resources must decide how well their current management practices will continue to serve them as the company gains greater visibility and faces an increasingly competitive labor market.
Case analysis:
SAS Institute is the largest privately owned
software company in the world that has been in existence for over 35 years. One
of the main reasons for the company’s continued success and growth is its
unique work culture and people management practices. But now the management is facing
a challenge of attracting and recruiting a talented work force that could help
it build and maintain its intellectual capital. The management must also decide
whether to maintain its unique approach to pay and other people management practices
in an increasingly competitive labor market.
SAS maintains focus on the people – both
customers as well as employees. The product development process at SAS is
primarily driven by customer wants, feedback and insights and the company tries
to provide a high level of customer service. Evans and Lindsay (2005) refer to
this as the “value-creation process which is most important to running the
business and maintaining or achieving a sustainable competitive advantage”[1]. I
found a similar customer focus at General Electric where I had to analyze and
justify the importance of every task from the customer’s perspective, and
reduce inefficiencies or chances of errors, which is one of the core principles
of Six-Sigma. The customer focus has given SAS a distinct advantage over its
competition in terms of the range of its product line and level of integration.
SAS has further strengthened its value-creation
processes with its unique recruitment, people management, compensation,
benefits and performance management policies, which Evans and Lindsay (2005) refer
to as “support processes that provide the infrastructure for value-creation
processes”[2]. The
organization culture at SAS is flat, informal and family-friendly. The company
believes in “treating everyone fairly and equally”[3]
and creating a good work environment. SAS encourages an open door policy, open
communication and minimal hierarchy. It is important to encourage open
communication within the company in order to address any concerns that can prevent
it from achieving its goal. A good work environment will definitely help SAS in
attracting and recruiting the best talent.
Goodnight believes that “if you take care of the
employees, the employees will take care of the company”. SAS’s commitment to
employee welfare is reflected in the benefits it provides such as on-site
medical facilities, gyms, Montessori day care, insurance, elder care
counseling, flexible work schedules, scholarships to children of employees,
help with housing and subsidized cafes. This has been one of the contributing
factors to SAS’s low employee turnover rates – less than 4% annually, in an
industry characterized by high attrition rates and has also helped the company
gain a good reputation. Caproni (2012)
explains this as the “reciprocation rule” to influence people which can be
simply stated as “if you give me something, I will feel obligated to give you
something in return”[4].
Frequently, employee benefits come at a cost of
low pay scales, which could also pose a challenge in attracting and retaining
the best talent in the industry, if the competitors are offering much higher
compensation packages. Infosys also faced a similar challenge attracting
entry-level employees because their compensation packages were the lowest
amongst its competitors, but the benefits offered were better. So they had to
restructure their compensation and benefits plans to match the pay scales of
their competitors.
The organizational culture at SAS also strongly emphasizes
collaboration, teamwork, cooperation and mutual respect. In an effort to retain
employees, there are frequent cross-functional transitions and re-assignment of
employees. This is a contrast with the culture at Matsushita where the CEO had
promoted internal competition by creating divisions based on products. As
stated by Yoshino and Endo (2005), “employee loyalty was cultivated at division
level and young staff recruited as trainees typically spent all or most of
their careers within the division in which they started”[5]. Initially,
it worked well for Matsushita, however with time, the divisions developed their
own subcultures, had intense internal rivalry and later posed a major challenge
to transforming and uniting the organization. SAS Institute has also developed
a strong culture and sometimes, that can hinder re-engineering and
transformation efforts.
At SAS, internal promotions, employee referrals
and hiring for “cultural fit” are given a higher preference when recruiting
people. Although this has worked well for the company so far, it could
encourage nepotism and pose as another challenge in recruiting the best talent
in the industry. Cha and Chatman (2003) state that “it makes sense to hire
people who will fit the culture, possibly even trading off some immediate
skills necessary for the specific entry job for better culture fit”, but they
also warn about the “similarity-attraction effect” whereby people recruit
others similar to them and not necessarily the best talent. While working at
Accenture, I found that the organization made a conscious effort to recruit
people from different age-groups, gender, ethnicity, educational background
(like engineering, commerce, arts etc.), and work experience and considered
“diversity as a critical strength”[6].
The reasoning behind this was that a diverse team could produce better ideas,
perspectives and solutions than a team comprised of members with homogeneous
backgrounds, which I found very effective. SAS will also need to consider altering
its recruiting strategy for diversity to continue its growth and become a
global organization.
SAS focuses on long-term commitments instead of
short-term profits, both in business as well as employee recruitment. As a
result, the employees trust the organization and have confidence in the
long-term success of the organization and are able to focus on the quality of
their work. The company is also open to risks and experimentation and gives
employees the freedom to innovate and explore their ideas and creativity to
come up with new products. Both these strategies have worked well for SAS in
supporting its competitive strategy of developing customer-driven products and
can help in attracting competent and innovative talent.
SAS does not outsource and uses very few contract
workers. This has benefited the company in terms of high quality products, but
as other competitors reaping the benefits of lower labor costs, management at
SAS might need to rethink their strategy for cost-effectiveness. In terms of compensation,
SAS does not provide stock options or financial incentives. As SAS grows
globally, it might need to revisit these criteria as stock options and
financial incentives (such as joining bonus or commissions) are a way of
attracting the best talent in some countries and paying them as per their
capabilities and expectations.
For performance management, I agree that the
strategy adopted by SAS of giving frequent feedback on performance instead of
an annual appraisal is very effective and is being adopted and implemented by
many organizations. Also SAS’s philosophy of assuming that their employees are
intrinsically motivated works well for them because they select employees that
are professional and self-starters, but it may not work well with a
non-professional or hourly compensation based employees.
Most of SAS’s people management policies and work
culture have worked well for the organization in the past and will continue to
do so. But some will need to be revisited to sustain competitive advantage. SAS
had a global revenue of $2.43 billion in 2010. The outsourcing policy has been
realigned with the SAS Alliance Outsourcing program in order to maintain the
competitive advantage. By maintaining focus on the customers and employees SAS
has maintained customer loyalty as well as high employee retention and has been
voted as the “Best Company to Work for”, for the second consecutive year by
Fortune Magazine in 2011. As the organization grows, re-structuring, delegation
and leadership development might be required at the managerial level to meet the
demands of an evolving market.
[1] Evans, J. R., &
Lindsay, W. M. (2005). Principles of Six Sigma. In An Introduction to Six Sigma & Process
Improvement. (1st ed.). (p. 29).
South-Western.
[2] Evans, J. R., &
Lindsay, W. M. (2005). Principles of Six Sigma. In An Introduction to Six Sigma & Process
Improvement. (1st ed.). (p. 29-30).
South-Western.
[3] Pfeffer, J. (1998). SAS
Institute: A Different Approach to Incentives and People Management Practices
in the Software Industry. Harvard Business Review, 6, 5
[4] Caproni, P. J. (2012).
Gaining and Using Sustainable, Ethical Power and Influence. Management Skills for Everyday Life: The Practical
Coach,
166-168.
[5] Yoshino, M. Y., &
Endo, Y. (2005). Transformation of Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
2005 (B). Harvard Business Review, 905413, 2-4.
[6] Nanterme, P. (n.d.).
Inclusion & Diversity at Accenture. Accenture.
Retrieved from
http://www.accenture.com/us-en/company/people/diversity/Pages/index.aspx
[1] Evans, J. R., &
Lindsay, W. M. (2005). Principles of Six Sigma. In An Introduction to Six Sigma & Process
Improvement. (1st ed.). (p. 29).
South-Western.
[2] Evans, J. R., &
Lindsay, W. M. (2005). Principles of Six Sigma. In An Introduction to Six Sigma & Process
Improvement. (1st ed.). (p. 29-30).
South-Western.
[3] Pfeffer, J. (1998). SAS
Institute: A Different Approach to Incentives and People Management Practices
in the Software Industry. Harvard Business Review, 6, 5
[4] Caproni, P. J. (2012).
Gaining and Using Sustainable, Ethical Power and Influence. Management Skills for Everyday Life: The Practical
Coach,
166-168.
[5] Yoshino, M. Y., &
Endo, Y. (2005). Transformation of Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
2005 (B). Harvard Business Review, 905413, 2-4.
[6] Nanterme, P. (n.d.).
Inclusion & Diversity at Accenture. Accenture.
Retrieved from
http://www.accenture.com/us-en/company/people/diversity/Pages/index.aspx