The question of appropriate compensation in purpose-driven companies is a timeless one. Many mission-oriented organizations wrestle with issues like: What constitutes a fair salary? How much should — and can — one earn while working for the common good? How do salaries in purpose-driven companies compare to the market?
Since there’s no one-size-fits-all solution to these questions, we developed our own salary process back in 2019. We’ve now fundamentally reworked it to make ourselves more resilient and regenerative — and we’d like to share the results with you here.
The core idea is this:
A salary process can never be “objectively” fair. The goal of our process is to minimize the sum of subjectively perceived unfairness.
Every salaried Diver is encouraged to submit a salary proposal they believe reflects the value of their contribution.
To foster openness and encourage dialogue, all salaries at TheDive — including proposed changes — are visible to all full-time Divers.
It’s clear that some roles come with more responsibility than others — and salaries should reflect that. However, to ensure fairness, the gap between the lowest and highest salary must not exceed a factor of 5.
If someone’s idea of appropriate compensation shifts — for example, due to taking on more responsibility or changes in personal circumstances — they can raise this as a “tension” and submit a proposal. This allows the organization to remain responsive, even to the unexpected.
The person raising a tension proposes two people to review their proposal — ideally one from their own circle and one from another. These reviewers, along with the newly introduced role of “Circle Economist,” form a resilient, well-rounded feedback group, making the process more co-creative.
Each proposal must be justified from three different angles:
- The individual perspective (Why should I earn more? What contributions justify my request?)
- The team perspective (Who can I be compared with in the organization, and based on what criteria?)
- The organizational perspective (How is TheDive doing financially?)
The process also takes into account various streams of contribution, aligning with our value creation accounting. Oversight is provided by the role of Compensation Strategist.
Proposals are limited in length and follow a one-page template to keep the effort manageable for everyone. The process is designed to avoid bureaucratic hurdles. Narrow salary bands help provide clarity and comparability.
If you’ve read our article on New Finance, it won’t come as a surprise that we’ve also said goodbye to the concept of a fixed salary budget. We believe this principle doesn’t align with the needs of a life-centric organization. Salary budgets restrict flexibility and responsiveness, and they tend to overlook contributions that can’t easily be monetized — but are essential for the (co-)evolution of the organization.
Thanks to newly developed salary criteria, we can now make these value streams visible, comparable, and integrated into decision-making. Here’s a sample of the question set designed to help Divers explore their contributions and define their salary request:
Below is an excerpt from the set of guiding questions designed to help Divers reflect on their contributions — and, in turn, articulate their desired salary: in die Entscheidungsfindung einbeziehen. Hier ein Auszug aus dem Fragenkatalog, der Diver*innen helfen soll, ihre Leistung und somit ihren Gehaltswunsch zu erörtern:
Responsibility & Contribution
- What responsibilities do I hold within my home circle and at TheDive as a whole?
- How would I describe my contribution to the development of my home circle?
- How — and to what extent — do I contribute to the overall evolution of TheDive?
Expertise & Experience
- What specific expertise and experience does my role (or do my roles) require?
- How much expertise do I currently bring to the table?
- In which areas would I like or need to grow further?
Performance & Achievements
- How well am I fulfilling my roles and responsibilities?
- What milestones or key objectives have I achieved in recent months?
- What projects have I implemented? What’s going well, and what’s (still) a challenge?
- Where do I see room for improvement?
- What have I already accomplished at TheDive — and what do I still want to achieve?
- If you're part of a BIZ circle: How much billable work have I contributed, and how do I assess that?
TheDive Culture
- To what extent do I take ownership of my own tensions?
- How independently and proactively do I shape my work within my roles (role autonomy)?
- How does my behavior contribute to transparent and trust-based collaboration?
- How well do I keep an eye on my own personal balance?
Market Perspective
- Which organizations can TheDive be compared to, and what would comparable roles be paid elsewhere?
- What could I earn for similar work in another organization?
Personal Factors
- What personal circumstances and goals inform or justify my salary request?
- Are there aspects of my situation that may require solidarity from the community?
This initial step is about reflecting on and articulating one’s own tensions. It ends with the decision of whether or not to submit a salary proposal.
The goal here is to write and submit a proposal. A proposal is considered officially submitted once the document is placed in the designated folder and the People Circle has been informed.
The two designated feedback givers now have two weeks to provide written feedback. After that, the Circle Economist joins the process. Building on the qualitative input, they offer economic feedback on the proposal. This step is complete once all feedback forms are fully filled out and stored in the salary process folder.
Now it’s back to the person who submitted the proposal. With access to all feedback via the process folder, they have three options: keep the proposal as is, withdraw it, or revise it.
The final decision is made collaboratively by the proposal initiator, the Circle Economist, and the Compensation Strategist through an objection integration process. If there are no objections, this step — and thus the entire process — is complete. If objections are raised, they are addressed using the consent-based integration method.
Until now, purpose-driven economies and traditional accounting practices could only coexist by embracing deep paradoxes. That’s changing. Under the umbrella of New Finance, we’re redesigning our economic processes in a systemic and agile way — and suddenly, it all makes even more sense.
The Lead role used to be the one where most leadership responsibilities were concentrated. Last year, we did away with it. More precisely, we redistributed its leadership functions across three distinct roles.
At TheDive, we constantly create new things.
Stay up to date with our newsletter!
At TheDive, we constantly create new things.
Stay up to date with our newsletter!