Originally Posted by
canadiancow
I guess a better way to word it is that low compensation guarantees low performance.
High compensation doesn't guarantee anything, but it's generally a requirement for high performance.
These unilateral comments are quite often not the case. No need to take it from anyone on this board, but perhaps some learnings can be gleaned from various studies that show that above a certain income, money no longer ranks #1 . E.g. various studies have indicated that when one exceeds an income of $75,000/year, that money often drops from most peoples' number one priorities.
While I would not agree that $75,000/year is sufficient for that to drop from #1 in my prior life, I can say I have declined several jobs in my working life that offered me more money.
All this to state that high or low compensation does not guarantee anything as there are a multitude of other reasons why an individual would prefer to work at a place that offers less than #1 compensation that he or she is able to make.
Unfortunately we will not know all the reasons Mr. Pugliese chose to join Air Canada.
Originally Posted by
skybluesea
exactly, hire those with a passion to learn, and pretty much everything else necessary to get job done will follow.
"and pay them enough". What enough means is different for everyone, but since we're on the discussion of absolutes here, thought I would add that piece.