Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE Corporation and Alliance Development => Topic started by: Casiella on 11 Jul 2010, 10:33
-
As an offshoot from the discussion in the Summit thread: Wanoah asserted (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=721.msg8141#msg8141) that "a corp genuinely can't function as a corp given the game mechanics". I don't know what specific mechanics prevent this, frankly. The corp UI definitely sucks -- even CCP recognizes this, even if they can't be assed right now to fix it -- but lots of corps do so, including investors, share apportionment, dividends, etc.
Then Mebrithiel has "been wanting to do wage based forever", but personally I think it's as a terrible idea IG as it is IRL. Why we would want to emulate that model, I don't think I understand.
Thoughts on corp models and setup?
-
I think LDIS (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Lai_Dai_Infinity_Systems_(Player_corporation)) comes as close as they come to that sort of model described. We've been doing it the whole time. :)
-
Then Mebrithiel has "been wanting to do wage based forever", but personally I think it's as a terrible idea IG as it is IRL. Why we would want to emulate that model, I don't think I understand.
I'm curious why you think wage-based is a bad idea? What does "wage-based corp in Eve" mean for you, and how it differs from profit sharing?
Isobel's corp Gradient has wages, and I like the system. I wonder how my and your mental image of "wage-based" differs.
-
there are many, many, many, many, many, many, many different types of corp models in Real Life.
My current corporate masters are a company named AIMCO and they are a RIET (Real Estate Investment Trust) with several subsidiaries and third party corporations that are L.P.(Limited Partnership).
My Previous employers were a non-profit corporation named OCCU which is a Co-Op; specifically a financial co-op (Credit Union)
I've worked for HMT which is an Ltd. but is currently consolidated so is…I don’t know, likely a post office box, a junk storage bin and one glass substrate manufacturing plant in Tiawan.
I've worked for a Mills Manufacturing, which was a Sole Proprietorship that became Incorporated.
I could go on and on.
the only uniform guideline for a corporation is that it is an institution recognized as a separate legal entity by charter and even that is not absolute.
Pay structure, job contract, stocks, law status, management, contractors and every other aspect of what a corporation is can be more or less unique to each company.
I believe CCP is privately held?
Good luck finding out their structure >_<
I imagine that since they have 500+ employees they do not “vend” or “contract” very much of their work but most of the techie companies here do run by contract so there isn’t even a wage type structure.
I am curious if their various games are held by subsidiary corporations and limited partnerships or if they are all part of the same profit reporting mothership ^_^
-
same profit reporting
The in-game entity (corp or alliance) has to be run with the intention of having a net increase in isk value. This drives different decisions on the part of an organization's leadership.
I think LDIS (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Lai_Dai_Infinity_Systems_(Player_corporation)) comes as close as they come to that sort of model described. We've been doing it the whole time. :)
We also have been making adjustments as we go. Initially implementing a system and then tweaking it as we learn. Initial we did more of a profit sharing system, this however made it difficult for account managers to do basic budgeting. There is a constant in and out flow of isk, but whenever payday hits, it is nice to have liquid isk around to pay folks. A wage system of some kind provides for that.
In the end, a corp needs to offer the characters (and players) something they can not just do on their own in an NPC corp/corp of 1. To be for-profit, the corp has to consider a much larger picture in terms of what they do.
-
"Corporation" generally does include a few things, such as the issuance of stock (though that stock may still be privately held), certain requirements for officers, etc. This mostly works to enable the concept of the corp as a legal person.
I don't like wage-based IRL because I'm fundamentally opposed to "pay for time" in most contexts, though I suppose it makes sense in some limited circumstances. IG, I'd just rather things not feel like a job: I don't want to log in because my boss makes me and I need that 100m ISK/week (or whatever), but because I have specific things I want to accomplish. They might be RP, they might be combat, they might be industrial (admittedly, usually the latter for me), but it's not because I have to clock in.
Pay for results, not for process.
-
I don't like wage-based IRL because I'm fundamentally opposed to "pay for time" in most contexts, though I suppose it makes sense in some limited circumstances. IG, I'd just rather things not feel like a job: I don't want to log in because my boss makes me and I need that 100m ISK/week (or whatever), but because I have specific things I want to accomplish. They might be RP, they might be combat, they might be industrial (admittedly, usually the latter for me), but it's not because I have to clock in.
Pay for results, not for process.
Ah, that is where our mental images differ.
Having mandatory "work hours" in something I do for relaxation does not appeal to me either. Fortunately, one can also pay a wage based on the work actually done. ;)
-
I love these discussions. Corporate organization has always been a fascination of mine, and I like to see how others handle their affairs.
I've been grappling with the wage-based system myself. One thing I don't like about handing out weekly or monthly 'paychecks' is that expectation of 'servitude' that I think we all want to avoid relating to our 9-5 jobs. The question then becomes, if you only pay for service, if the job is risky what is the adequate reward for said risk, and can the company make a profit on this model?
As an exploration company, what I've done is when we schedule corp ops for said activity, all items earned go to the company, and based on what's retrieved the company pays out the value of the items to the participants equally in based on a flat ISK value up front. This way, the members get the immediate gain of participating and the company may be able to eek in a profit selling on the open market. It does require the company to have an initial capital to do this and a chance to be able to sell it at a higher price.
I definitely try to encourage our members to build and sell internally. I give my members a huge discount when they buy from me and its always below market value. Encouraging that 'comraderie' as opposed to trying to rape everyone like the open market gives some feeling of unity.
Otherwise, I'm not of a fan of communist models; people don't seem to get a personal sense of accomplishment when they risk bodily harm and it all goes into the corporate machine. If someone has some good examples of how this works though, I'd love to hear it.
-
TBH, this is part of the reason why I personally prefer the coalition (http://copernicuscoalition.com) model: for big stuff I can't handle on my own, I have friends ("hey want to help me with this site?" "anyone in Derelik that can provide a cyno?"), but generally speaking, I don't see what a corp can provide me as a trader and explorer that I can't provide myself.
I view every capsuleer as sort of a "head of division", assuming they have lots and lots of non-capsuleer support staff: crew, hangar maintenance, admin assistants, personal bodyguards when stationside, etc.
-
Interspacial Specialists is a wormhole corporation, so we opperate much diferently now than what we did while living in empire space.
From our forums:
Below please find the method in which the members involved in the Inter-Spacial Operations (wormhole space) will share in the profits gained, and contribute to the other divisions of the corporation.
On application a member of ISPEC may join the ISPEC Inter-Spacial Operations and move to our station (POS) inside our wormhole. During this time a member will not be allowed to generate personal wealth though mission running, mining, manufacturing or trade in known space. It is assumed that all of a members time will be spent generating income for the WH division.
A member is free to do any activity of his choice in the wormhole, at any time, which may include sleeper complexes, mining and combat against fellow capsuleers (PvP). A member may engage in activities of his preference, but in the event that there are no sites to his preference he should participate in other ways. Thus, if there are no combat sites available a member with combat preferences will participate in or contribute to the mining operations or PvP, and vice versa.
Everything gained from all activities will be placed in the corporation hangar at the POS.
Once there is sufficient loot and minerals gathered in the corp hangar, all loot will be hauled to empire space and sold on the market, with all income being put in the “Inter-Spacial Operations” wallet division.
From the “Inter-Spacial Operations” wallet division a cash sum for fuel costs incured since the last division of profits is deducted and transferred into the “Retained Income” wallet division. The remaining balance in the “Inter-Spacial Operations” wallet division will be the net profit generated, which will be distributed to the members in the WH POS during that period of time.
The net profit will be divided equally between the “Main” wallet division, the “Retained Income” wallet division and each participating member (“the participants”). Each participant will share equally. For example, if there were 3 members in the WH POS during that period of time the income will be divided into 5 parts, one part going to the “Main” wallet division, one to the “Retained Income” wallet division and the rest to the participant members equally.
Kindly note that for the purposes of profit sharing each "crew", consisting of a member and his agents (alts), will be regarded as one participant.
_________________________________
Why does two portions of the profit get distributed to the corporation?
The “Retained Income” wallet division is the corporations reserve fund. It is used to pay for all POS fuel costs, to expand the POS and replace POS losses if attacked.
The “Main” wallet division is used to pay the corporation running costs. Any additional income above these costs is used to expand our high-sec operations which may include expanding the corporation blue print collection and manufacturing capabilities in order to provide ships and modules to members at discount prices.
Without the contribution by the Inter-Spacial Operations division to the "Retained Income" and "Main" divisions the corporation would not have the necessary funds to continue its current operations or to expand.
This system works well for our small corp, which has had a stable set of members for 1 year now. Trust in this system is key as everyone gets an equal share of the income no matter the number of hours put in per week.
It fits in well with the corp location, as well as my roleplaying goals, which was the reason to establish a wormhole POS in the first place.
-
The in-game entity (corp or alliance) has to be run with the intention of having a net increase in isk value.
if you define in-game corps as different that RL. a corp is defined is as i posted above. there are many corps in real life that actually are non-profit :bear:
-
Good point, then there a lot of non-profits in eve.
-
Not all the corps in real life who don't make a profit intend to not make a profit.
I've worked for at least one of them...
-
I've run a couple of them. ;)
-
Ugh... :bash:
-
I view every capsuleer as sort of a "head of division", assuming they have lots and lots of non-capsuleer support staff: crew, hangar maintenance, admin assistants, personal bodyguards when stationside, etc.
Bingo - this was the first thing that came to mind.I figure we have crew and accountants doing the chicken little for us and when our wallet flashes, that's our cut after the crew has been paid.
-
Technically even NPC military groups like The Amarr Navy are considered to be 'corporations'. A better generic term for most corps would probably be 'organization' or 'unit' or something like that.
If you wanna take the term 'corp' literally, the hardest part would be to make your corp fun enough to keep your members. People don't always enjoy it when fun turns into work.
-
I don't like wage-based IRL because I'm fundamentally opposed to "pay for time" in most contexts, though I suppose it makes sense in some limited circumstances.
It's a service exchange. It's still the barter system. When you go to a store to buy something, you are offering something you have (money) for something they have that you want (for instance, pears). The value of that object is based on demand and supply.
Alternatively, when you go to work, the company is offering something they have (money) for something you have that they want (man hours).
Money for Time is an excellent thing, imo. If there is anything wrong at all, it's that people undervalue their time, and I don't mean the companies, they're obviously going to offer the least amount of money they can and barter up.
-
No, fundamentally, I don't measure my output based on time. Time is an input; what I get done is my output. My employer, ultimately, doesn't care about time. It cares about results. And for those of us working on salary, that difference becomes even starker.
The problem there is that you get issues with folks who skate by, doing just enough not to get fired while still pulling down salary.
IRL, all sorts of complexities lead to the situations commonly seen today, and I expect that that model will evolve. IG, I see no reason to continue that same model.
-
This is a really interesting discussion.
As Lillith said, people give up time for money. As Cas said, the employer will hopefully be able to convert that time in to a valued output, it's not the time, per se, that they care about.
As soon as you pay a person based on time - rather than output - there is a decreased incentive for them to work hard. This is even worse if you pay your employees on an annual basis. People don't want to work hard (since it's an imposition on them), and as long as the remuneration isn't tied to output, there is an incentive-outcome mismatch.
So employers try and structure performance monitoring systems/rewards so that incentives (or disincentives) are attached to outcomes (or lack thereof).
No one approach is best, and different industries will call for different approaches.
How does this relate to Eve Corps? The most successful corps, in my opinion, have an alignment between their members' desires and the corp's objectives. In fact, in a lot of cases, the corp's objective arises because of the members desires. If a corp is worried about achieving a certain outcome, it can increase the chances of getting it by rewarding that outcome (e.g. paying ISK per confirmed pod kill). In some cases though, it's the time that is important and the incentive should reflect that (e.g. pay pilots an hourly reward for camping a gate to an important system).
I think a really good example of incentives in action in Eve is Hulkageddon. Sure, Helicity could just announce on the forums "let's all kill hulks" (without any incentives). Some pirates would still go ganking, but much fewer hulks would die. However, because there are prizes and less tangible rewards (e.g. forum recognition), the objective (dead hulks) is achieved much more strongly.
I think output linked incentives are underused in Eve. Corps with clear output-tied reward structures (that are reliable and unlikely to change) can do quite well.
-
I think a really good example of incentives in action in Eve is Hulkageddon. Sure, Helicity could just announce on the forums "let's all kill hulks" (without any incentives). Some pirates would still go ganking, but much fewer hulks would die. However, because there are prizes and less tangible rewards (e.g. forum recognition), the objective (dead hulks) is achieved much more strongly.
I think output linked incentives are underused in Eve. Corps with clear output-tied reward structures (that are reliable and unlikely to change) can do quite well.
Ding ding ding! And I love your example. Not only does it highlight one of my favorite things about EVE (the implications of the sandbox). So what can RP-ish corps do to follow this sort of model? Industrial-type corps have a fairly obvious model, or at least class of models -- if, say, you want members inventing BPCs, then pay them per BPC produced. If you want them building ships, same thing. Maybe you do some creative things to get people to move up to more profitable activities (training T2 construction skills higher, etc.)
What about non-industrial corps? One of the great attractions of FW, I think, is the structure and obvious activities it provides pilots: you get game-provided ranks, tangible outputs (system occupancy, even if it's meaningless >.<), and easily-understood hooks into the larger backstory. Similarly, U'K and CVA have done a good job rolling with their areas of the backstory.
I need to go chew on this some more for the areas I want to develop: maybe tying incentives to producing Cartel factional equipment, or importing exotic dancers, or....?
-
No, fundamentally, I don't measure my output based on time.
You don't measure a purchase of a commodity based on output. When you go to buy fuel for your car or a bunch of strawberries (fuel for you! :D ) you're not buying the output performance of the strawberries being delicious. You're buying a resource, such as the strawberries, which may or may not be as delicious as you want them to be.
This is what companies are paying for. They're paying for a resource (man hours) that you supply to them. If the performance is not up to standard then they will replace you with someone else that can supply them the same resource (which is harder if it is a skilled job, obviously, which is why the pay for skilled jobs is higher, same demand, lesser supply).
You're looking at the equation from the wrong direction, as paying for results is why people achieve bonuses, and companies that apply rational and realistic bonuses generally have more productive workers. Results are incentivized, but they are not what the majority of companies are paying for, nor should they be.
Trust me, as one who has worked in commission based industries, working for a company that pays you only on performance sucks ass.
Time is an input; what I get done is my output. My employer, ultimately, doesn't care about time. It cares about results. And for those of us working on salary, that difference becomes even starker.
The thing is you're not entirely correct. Your company cares a lot about time. Time is of the utmost factor of any CEO's priority list. They want results, yes, but they want results quickly. This is why they pay for time.
The problem there is that you get issues with folks who skate by, doing just enough not to get fired while still pulling down salary.
And this is why many companies incentivize performance with some sort of profit-sharing structure. Because you have to pay for the resource (aka time), and that only gets someone to come in and work. You then incentivize performance, and that makes them work better.
But simply paying based on results is bad, it's very bad, because it opens up an entire can of worms where the company can really abuse the worker, and vice versa. It also tends to foster illegal and semi-legal activities on the part of the employee, attempting to milk more money out of the system.
IRL, all sorts of complexities lead to the situations commonly seen today, and I expect that that model will evolve. IG, I see no reason to continue that same model.
Because it's functional, and could be interesting.
-
I think the real question people need to ask themselves for running corps in Eve is whether or not a chosen organizational model is suitable for the amount of investment in both time and energy of the leadership/management team and the member-base itself. Not much point implementing an organizational structure no one is willing to carry through or oversee.
For myself however, I think the organizational model of a corporation is less important than ensuring buy-in into the corporation by the grunts and having a dedicated and effective top level leadership cadre able to act with intelligence and initiative on behalf of the corporation. Then again I've always placed corporate morale, esprit de corps, camaraderie and effective leadership as more important than organizational structure.
I think what I'm trying to say is that a corporation is its people. If you get the right people, and are able to inculcate in them your vision you can achieve a lot regardless of what structure you use. Get the wrong people, or find yourself unable to provide them with a shared vision then it does not matter how you organize the corp really, you're still liable to hit a brick wall.
-
I think what I'm trying to say is that a corporation is its people.
Yes. I'd personally use the word corporate identity instead of vision for an Eve corp, but I believe we are talking of the same thing. And I agree ultimately organization exists to serve the corp.