I must have missed it but what kind of value does your "blockchain startup" provide?

Good read

I will share this blog.

that's why people offering different solutions how to make neighbourhood's with the leaders to just give themselves votes and resteems and grow like a clan or something.
would love to get more detailed info about that 😉
"Nature will rise against you" just kidding . Dota Fan

Yeah a bunch of people would become friends and bully the system as a group.

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmV5ApxeLUPGqVechHjvi5qRKNUST5hnz6CNqbkVnM7qJq/image.png]

These friends would work and stay together. :D

Is there a chain of command? or is everyone equal? The higher the person is on the chain of command should receive more voting power.

Good question. If the person in leadership position is doing a good job, more people will dedicate their shares to that person, thus resulting in higher proportion of a bonus.

If a person on the 'top' does not receive sufficient votes, its an indication that he may not be doing a very good job.

Seems like it would work, also length of employment should be factored in

Length of employment is factored in implicitly, as people who worked together for longer are more likely to vote for each other. Veterans also likely have bigger role or stronger recognition in the organization.

People who join the team early also get more tokens during the first bonus rounds, because:
a.) The token is worth less, thus more tokens are given out.
b.) The team is smaller, so each person gets a bigger piece of the pie.

Got it. seems interesting for sure!

Furion do you think the Steemit Approach would work with the real world? Where the crowd decides who get what money?

This is how the decision about who gets what money is done on Steemit. Hint: it isn't the crowd.

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmaB7VhuLwRvAHX9rahRCA18RZx5Q9A9VZTUsDSqgvueXG/authorrewardchart.png]

The distribution of rewards on Steemit is decided by those that have the most Steem, and they keep it.

Can you elaborate a bit more on that or provide a link to where more info on this can be found?

I didn't resteem this post iirc, so only have a link to a reply I made.

https://steemit.com/hf19/@valued-customer/re-timcliff-re-valued-customer-re-timcliff-re-aggroed-hf-19-the-cluusdterf-ckening-and-unintended-consequences-20170617t170606910z

> If a person on the 'top' does not receive sufficient votes, its an indication that he may not be doing a very good job.

Or he or she is not hot enough. :D

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmbGmhPut28dhEyeX1RNSxGt4eaPLwgrLuPu953aTo3dN5/image.png]

what about the time taken to work or taken by each positioned employees ??

The constant problem is the attraction of popularity. The higher in the foodchain or comment list the more likely you are to be heard and therefore the more likely t be voted up. Popularity breeds success not truth.

Thank you for writing this Article . It inspired me to write my own thoughts and dreams down.

>Fire fast, and pay people fairly when they leave

how?
I don't believe in equal pay
no offense - IMHO - it would bring society down this way
seen it happened in my country
though I understand it when someone feels like - it should be so
and honestly I sometimes get upset casting my up
specially when the post sucks and didn't see it
but what sucks for me might be great to the others
so - still hard to weigh
Great post and many great points though

I feel like there would still be politics within any group that gets paid the same amount @furion @bscot020, I feel that politicking would still exist because we would still have the few who would want to take control, and the sheeple who follow them. I've seen this happen in my own projects I've been forced into with other people... neat idea though, if I could vote on making that an actual system, I would be all for it. Keep it up! upvoted!

Yeah but theres people who think their shit dont stink and think theyre 100% correct everytime. I see it all the time in the corporate setting. The "If I get paid the same as you why should I follow your directions or listen to you?" People. Their would definitely have to be rewards/bonuses involved to have people driving the plane.

I love the idea. The only flaw I can see is what would motivate a staff member to excel and strive for an incentive without a financial reward (other than bonuses) in place? I understand pride in the project and work would be the primary attribute you’d be looking for, and you want the person to take pride and be exceptionally motivated of their own accord - but I can’t see a ‘permanent’ salary with no hope of that increasing as a viable option - even if their own project and therefore tokens increases in value over time

Without incentives we would eventually even run out of toilet paper. Why bother to innovate, to be more efficient, to work extra hours, to find new and better uses of the work hours, etc. SOCIALISM IS A DISASTER!

If the employee earns $1000 a month, his boss should earn $1025 a month. Problem solved, the worker no longer earns the same as the boss. :D

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmbGmhPut28dhEyeX1RNSxGt4eaPLwgrLuPu953aTo3dN5/image.png]

This is why I advise a democratic system in start-ups. The leader has to give a speech and petition, those who want to lead have to earn it, and those who don't want to lead get a say in who is chosen. Majority rules and that is life. All people will never be satisfied all the time, and that is totally fine.

Or use a voting power to run the business instead of pre-define roles as CEO.

Cheers,
Follow me @Yehey

Why? Different tasks require different skills. If a pool of skills is necessary to a project, then why should one skillset be differentially weighted?

oh good

Flat organizations (google: Holacracy, Flat Organizations) do not have hierarchy and there is no "chain of command".

Hierarchies are problematic. They create stress for those lower down therefore stifling innovation. Perhaps a fluid system of creatives that get equal money but allows them to reward their betters for their output and or reliability. Reward others for their contribution to the whole and to your "wellbeing" - yes crap term. Steemit works like that.

Probably should be based on stock allocation.

Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others.

This would be ideal in Utopia, human beings are driven by primitive urges, we don't want to admit it but it's true. Great post

Which is why us biologists are SO eager to reengineer our species a bit !

Lol

Don't do today what you can do tomorrow. :D

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmbGmhPut28dhEyeX1RNSxGt4eaPLwgrLuPu953aTo3dN5/image.png]

Thankfully tomorrow never comes, and it's always today!

I think the saying is "Don't do tomorrow what you can have someone else do today"

That's something amazing.... Keep the good work going... Really impressed with the post...

A bunch of great ideas for any project... Although i don't see something like this happening any time soon..

Not until humans become zombie-robots-ninjas-pirates.
[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmbGmhPut28dhEyeX1RNSxGt4eaPLwgrLuPu953aTo3dN5/image.png]

This sounds like a great idea but I don't think $5,000 would be enough. First off many techies live in expensive cities San Fran, Boston, NYC, London, etc. and for them $5,000 likely wouldn't be enough. Secondly if underpaid people might be more prone to selling votes or voting for self serving things. That said is there an amount high enough to prevent this?

$5000 is more than enough unless you're living in time square.
Unless you're buying prostitute-time or going and getting $100 meals at restaurants every week I really can't fathom even spending $5000/month living a location as an individual or without a huge family.

I'm in Boston and with taxes, retirement, rent, etc. it adds up pretty fast. $5,000 after taxes would definitely be doable though.

I have not thought of the internal corruption that would lead to selling votes.

The only remedy against this is to have honesty and integrity as core values (founders need to posses these traits) and let go of people that aren't fit.

If votes are equal bad actors working independently or together could slowly infiltrate and corrupt the system. This is pretty much the biggest weakness of our current government. I'm not sure it's solvable though. It's a tough problem to tackle.

Maybe allow only a 70% community vote to fire someone. That way corruption would only occur if it was incognito or the users also became corrupt.

There may still be some techie types living in Itapemirim, Huamboya, Charallave, Higuerote, Sibundoy and Tupiza.

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmbGmhPut28dhEyeX1RNSxGt4eaPLwgrLuPu953aTo3dN5/image.png]

I'm sure there are, but we should aim for every city to be livable with the pay so we can get the best most committed devs no matter where they are. Then again to get US devs you're paying enough others would join purely for the money but paying based on location seems unfair...

:)

Wow, this is a bold path for any business to proceed down, but the level of equality is amazing, Maybe the head should have more voting power, a leader does need to prove himself, but the stress of running a company and being liable might need more than just regular pay to keep interest in your own company and not burn out.

Do you think equal pay for everyone will drive performance? The end result may be failure !

The performance is evaluated separately, and rewarded trough token bonuses.

Ok.

Great topic.

I strongly agree. Resteem yess!

Interesting pay model and different than what was used in the past.

As a thought experiment, I might go along with your ideas, with some modifications.

Founders might be offered compensation for their time worked on the project before the crowdsale, at the same rate of $5000 per month of work they put in.

I might do token distribution every 3 months, to match the standard business quarter. I might distribute half equally among all employees.

The other half I might distribute using the voting you suggested, but half of those voted tokens via open voting (perfect information) and half by secret voting. No secret voting could be for oneself. There are situations in groups where you feel you need to remedy a situation without it being public knowledge.

Just adding to the discussion you started, thanks!

The problem with secret voting is that its not really secret - at least someone has access to the vote info.

I think its better to make it public regardless, because if there are issues in the organization, and if voting event brings these issues up and starts the conversation, it will be better for the company in the long run (assuming action is taken to resolve the leading issues, and not just "kick the can down the road").

Thanks for your reply!

I like to think that when I vote in elections in the US in November that I am casting a secret vote, but maybe I am deluding myself. :D

I would keep the public voting in the process to help quickly resolve issues, but I think that the part of the process involving secret voting will also point out issues when the result is tallied. It just gives another way to do it, for people with different personality types who prefer to voice their opinion anonymously.

Plus, if the public voting and the secret voting yield completely different results, then THAT in itself is Information. It might show that there are issues in how freely a person feels they can bring up other issues without stigma or penalty.

I agree on that one, Nice views!

I agree with the sentiment that $5000 is not enough. The problem with have a low salary cap is that people expect wage growth over the course of ~45-year career. Even if $5k was a good starting place you'd have huge turnover in your company. One interesting idea may be to pay everyone the absolute max you could afford. Say that ends up being $15k/month, for example. That way you'd attract top talent, retain them longer as they would have a hard time getting a higher offer elsewhere, and you could quite reasonably expect a lot from them. My experience of working in a tech company where there is large pay disparity everywhere is that people tend to perform up unto the level they think they're expected to perform at, based on title and salary. I think highly paid people would work harder and they would be easier to weed out if they're not living up to their high salary expectations. Your can decide to reinvest additional revenues into the salary too, were the business to be a runaway success which would only further boost morale.

So what exactly are you doing. Are you providing a product or service? Is it an investment?

If this is an investment, it is hopefully better than the Fast Amazing Program else everyone will be in for some huge disappointment.

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmeF48or5FnSSd73dk6AGYFFH1CZYbi8WuXoDwrfFsWX1v/image.png]

really interesting post.upvoted and resteemed

Please go https://steemit.com/followers/@sayyedraza/altcoin-speculation

or follow me i will follow you

Followed & Upvoted
Follow back please :) and upvote one of my blogs thankyou ;)
@thecrytotrader

I could work as Linux Administrator of the whole ecosystem for just 3000 USD :p

Very intriguing ideas. Setting up a government is no small task. Balance of power is one of the most precarious endeavors

Very interesting read. You've earned a new follower my friend! :)

This post received a 32% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @furion! For more information, click here!

Interesting view but same salary across the board will not work in my opinion.

People with higher skill sets and responsible will find it unfair. I personally wouldn't work in a company like that.

While the purpose is to dismiss a politic according to your view but in the same way it will create another politic :)

Take a look at this article
http://www.businessinsider.com/dan-price-gravity-payments-employees-leave-2015-7

Upvoted you :)

hhhh never heard paying myself before but its a good stratgy anyway nice post!!

Do you literally own a company under these conditions or are you just posing the question? I think you have some very interesting ideas.

I am thinking out loud, and asking for feedback, for my upcoming venture.

Ah I see. I personally think your plan is pretty solid! ^^

Interesting.

Good question. If the person in leadership position is doing a good job, more people will dedicate their shares to that person, thus resulting in higher proportion of a bonus.

If a person on the 'top' does not receive sufficient votes, its an indication that he may not be doing a very good job.

When you say that, you're talking about offering incentives based on performance.

I worked in an executive position for many years and was on the board. No, it wasn't anything like the hypothetical scenario you present. But Performance Related Incentives (PRPs) were offered based on specific performance results.

Everything from the performance of individuals and the results was discussed at monthly meetings, and decided upon only with the consensus of all employees.

There were a couple of employees who were frequent recipients of such monthly incentives, as they continued to put in far more effort than the others.

While the results were there for all to see - it led to envy and problems in the workplace.

Additional thoughts on the distribution of tokens?

I think the concept of equal pay may work better when it is equal pay for equal work.

Enjoyed reading your post.

In the system proposed above, hypothetically, everybody gets a bonus, however the size of the bonus varies based on final consensus of all members of the organization.

The social contract that sets expectations needs to be put in place and communicated properly (and frequently), so that there is some basis for evaluation.

People that are toxic to the environment, and don't deliver should be fired fast.

It is hard for me to envisage such a situation, having been used to the hierarchical workplace structure throughout my professional life. The majority of us get so caught up with the existing system that we forget there is need for change.

However, I appreciate the need for workplace equality that's not just gender-based.

Loved this:

People that are toxic to the environment, and don't deliver should be fired fast.

Enjoyed your post. Following you.

I only thought as far as startups go. Organizations at scale are a totally different beast, and I have absolutely no idea on how to structure those.

Thats true! listen to what Furion has to say :)

I like the concept of all this. Very fair!

thank you for good posting

It is a good business to pay equally, yet it does subject some to work less knowing the OT won't benefit them. I suggest a similar payment method with opportunity for bonus payment. This ensures everyone has the same base pay, yet there is reason to push the envelope on the job. Good luck! Followed

Amazing
Good post
Best

Parece seguro, debería recibir más voto

great post
and i agree, unfortunately its still a dream
but lets see what future brings

Only if we could all be considered equal so we earn the same amount and there would be less problems in the world . No social classes

Interesting idea.

Do you think we would lose incentive for posting quality and it will be more about voting on everything?

Interesting post. Although, you may have a hard time getting executives to voluntarily agree to a contract of 5,000 a month when the lower level personnel receives the same. It's kind of a status thing, and the equal pay removes that. Besides, aren't some jobs worth more to the company than others?

Say, a guy with 5 years Web Development experience and a BA in Computer Science gets hired to do all the front and back end work on the company website. Cool. Then, lets say that you need to hire a person to systematically clean the kitchen equipment and do various upkeep on the property. This person has no job related experience. They would both be worth the same amount to the company?

Just some thoughts to ponder. Unique idea though . . . I'd probably be the guy that took the job and said:
http://imgur.com/RZ08mj6.gif

Its really impressed with post.
Im from korea. Google transrator helps me to understand your post.
Thanks for your good posting

There is a tremendous difference between force and power if you think about it. Such a difference exists between creator and followers. A creator of an idea makes a platform where smaller creations occur. If you remove that difference then you may not foster the greatest creative minds. You must reward the top creator so more like him/ her can move the rest forward. We were not created equal but perhaps in the eyes of the one.

Great thoughts

i like the idea to pay all the same amount - good post

Yes, we should receive equal amount of salary $5000.

I voted up, followed and resteeem...

Cheers,
Follow me @Yehey

Well awesome article! But I'm not happy to see that monthly $5000 salary seems impossible even in next 100 years.

♥ upvoted.please resteem my introduction post if possible.Thanks friend. ♥

Isn't paying all skill-sets the same, regardless of their value, anti-meritocratic? Wouldn't that lead to poor long-term talent allocation similar to Communism?

Can't work since steemit is not built on socialist intent but capitalist intent. Hard work pays thru good contents and consistency. As a new member those shall be my style as am ready to let out the steem in me. Good post...keep it up

This is a fascinating concept.

It appears to me, the power is in the hiring process and the on-boarding systems you utilize in the first 60 days.

Any ripple of individual dissension would need to be addressed immediately - and within some structure (in my opinion), as there is typically going to be some "testing of the boundaries" in the beginning. Handling those initial developments consistently (and with a plan already in place) should help you to alleviate any negative emotions that arise.

I'm really excited for you!

Because this is a totally new concept, nullifying the pay would insinuate the culture must carry the team/startup (as is normal). It's the culture that will help you "get out ahead" of any of the challenges this type of equal pay structure could create.

I am intrigued! I hope to hear more as you continue to build and adjust your vision.

Way to position yourself firmly outside of the box!

Your plan may work at first... but remember the 80/20 rule. 80% of the work is done by 20% of the people. These are your superstars - the ones that will take your company to the next level. Some may be motivated by your utopian ideas, but after awhile, human nature takes over. Why work harder than the next guy, when you both get compensated the same. Unless bonuses or other perks are out of the park home runs for the superstars, many will eventually leave. I see this all the time in the healthcare industry, where many people are altruistic. Eventually, if their harder work is not appreciated, they vote with their feet. Just my 2 cents worth.

seems intersting...good idea!!!

Great post..Upvoted

Congratulations @furion! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/70x80/http://steemitboard.com/notifications/comments.png] Award for the number of comments

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. Learn how here!

How do we go about to apply or do you get approached from somebody in your group? I farm in South Africa and would be very interested to join this innovative.

Yes @furion everyone has their own value to get the salary. As I am having no idea what I am doing but I am learning from you always. Thanks a lot.

Congrats on the crowd fund. I like your business model. This post says a lot about you. Money is not the driving force and so you are likely going to do extremely well.

I admire those who wish to build a successful company first and pay them selves second. That's the mindset you need if you wish to reach new highs in this world.

A small amount of companies have done this (that I have heard of) not sure how it went. The morale and teamwork seem to better and stronger. I guess some studies would need to take place to see how efficient it would be, I think it would be better than the current.

Thank you for posting.
Resteemed.

Nice hypothesis. Although I am not sure how much comfortable will it be for a senior to receive a same salary as his junior. But nothing wrong in trying new things!!

I like your Profile name and photo,
hope you get an arcana soon XD

Terima kasih untuk balasan Anda!

Saya suka berpikir bahwa ketika saya memilih dalam pemilihan di AS pada bulan November bahwa saya memberikan suara rahasia, tapi mungkin saya menipu diri sendiri. : D

Saya akan membiarkan pemungutan suara publik dalam proses untuk membantu menyelesaikan masalah dengan cepat, tapi saya pikir bagian dari proses yang melibatkan pemungutan suara secara rahasia juga akan menunjukkan masalah saat hasilnya dihitung. Ini hanya memberi cara lain untuk melakukannya, untuk orang dengan tipe kepribadian berbeda yang lebih suka menyuarakan pendapat mereka secara anonim.

Ditambah lagi, jika pemungutan suara publik dan pemungutan suara rahasianya menghasilkan hasil yang sama sekali berbeda, maka BAHWA itu sendiri adalah Informasi. Ini mungkin menunjukkan bahwa ada masalah bagaimana orang merasa merasa terbebas dari masalah lain tanpa stigma atau hukuman.

I have a different strategy. I believe competition is king. Even with 5K the team can get quite related in time.

I would hire two teams doing the same exact thing for the same project paying them all 5k like you proposed. The only difference is that there will be bonuses paid for each time a team reaches a timeline goal.

The team that finishes the project first gets to enjoy a far bonus.

We need to be careful with incentives, as they may yield unexpected results. If we reward speed of delivery, we may end up with low quality software that was duct-taped together in a shortest amount of time, and needs to be fixed-rewritten.

Surely there will be an evaluation team in place.

I agree to the utmost.
Timelines, pulled out of a "hat" are just hopeful wishes by greedy execs.

Much better to reward great work and evolution over time, and understand what is being
attempted and how difficult it is; request much communication, but do not dictate results.

double or nothing.

$5000 per month would be more than enough for average person. Nice post @furion

Founders usually carry most (if not all) of the risk associated by starting a new company. Founders are therefor in the end responsible for it all, for making sure enough capital is earned so that everyone can get paid.

Also it's usually the idea of the founder, hopefully a new idea or an improvement over an existing idea.

Greater risk should carry greater reward in my opinion.
And I think you won't find any founder/entrepreneur who will think otherwise.

If you had an awesome idea and become a founder/entrepreneur and you carried all of the risks, wouldn't you want a possible greater reward?

Disclaimer: reward from the founder should hang on the success of the project, if unsuccessful (s)he won't have a good reward either.

I don't think founders should get a large stake upfront. By virtue of being first however, they will participate in most token distribution events, and thus accumulate the largest stake of coins.

Let me say that running a company or a startup is hard and there isn't one right way to do it and all approaches come with pros and cons.

I like your approach, but it can work only for a certain type of people and finding the right people to fit into it would be quite hard.

Let me point out a few of the caveats I see from my limited experience with startups and management.

I think everybody having the same salary might also create additional tension because people will be annoyed by the fact that other people that put in less effort than them or create less value than them are getting paid the same. I've been in a situation where I felt people less qualified than me that were less crucial to the company were getting paid more because of superficial reasons and it was quite demotivating and led to me eventually moving on.

The token voting events might become popularity contests that wouldn't necessarily reflect team members contributions and might focus on how pleasant they are for their coworkers instead.

In my humble opinion, nothing motivates people to work hard on startups like shares of the company. It aligns everybody's interests towards the same common goal. I like the model of low salary coupled with stake in the company increasing over time.

Founders and leadership are extremely crucial and it usually makes a lot of sense for them to have a high stake in their own venture. Especially in the early stages, investors give money because they believe in the founders' abilities rather than the idea itself. People need to be motivated to start companies and taking the risk and putting everything on line warrants their rewards.

I don't think founders should get a large stake upfront. By virtue of being first however, they will participate in most token distribution events, and thus accumulate the largest stake of coins.

As far as voting events becoming popularity contests: maybe. This seems more likely as the organization becomes bigger.

I think we just have to try it, and if it doesn't work, we can always change/fix the model.

>I don't think founders should get a large stake upfront. By virtue of being first however, they will participate in most token distribution events, and thus accumulate the largest stake of coins.

In the regular startups, the founder starts with a larger stake at a low valuation and then usually gives quite a bit of that at each funding round to "make room" for investiors. I'm talking about a stake in the company. A company that is doing a cryptocurrency startup should not be holding a huge chunk of the pie in my opinion.

>As far as voting events becoming popularity contests: maybe. This seems more likely as the organization becomes bigger.

I've seen this type of problems play out quite early, but it really depends on the team. I by no means claim that is inevitable or even likely, I'm just pointing out it's possible.

>I think we just have to try it, and if it doesn't work, we can always change/fix the model.

That's for certain. I by no means claim that this could not work. It could certainly be great for the right kind of team. Maybe it will be very fitting for crypto enthusiasts, I'm just point out a few possible problems, that's all.

Interesting article

Thank you very much for this post.

The title sounds like the start of a revolution. LOL

I believe in equality, but I think everyone has to be paid according to the effort and the results

money don't mean nothing, I do like your idea to better knowledge

good sharing..
Although long, but nice to read..
thank for you..

It would be nice to see what would happen for real that's for sure.

Why perfect information regarding bonus votes? I can imagine horrible scenarios resulting from this, if who is voting for what is known. Perhaps I do not understand, and you mean the votes, not who is casting them, are known.

Other than an arbitrary figure for salary, it seems pretty fair.

That's, I think, why it isn't done that way.

Interesting read, followed and upvoted!

Love this concept. If you build a team of like minded, positive, non greedy people, all striving to achieve the same goals, then the $5000 is a great idea. Perhaps that amount can go up with successes and go down with growth in the company. I would absolutely join a team like this with these dynamics.

I agree that founders shouldn't be entitled to a stake because they already have a head start through knowing all the ropes and having the leadership position. One thing without question though: they should never LOSE that position, as it has so many times happened in the corporate world.

I disagree, founders should definitely be fire-able, with fair compensation.

I guess you could monetize the position. Determining what fair compensation is, becomes key then, and the answer to that would probably still be left to the founders.

Just pay me enough to fund an amazing life style. ;)

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmeVDXzxtkx1ZvtAxDSCwmgd1aRkn8F1bTuFWqKrvQhmYZ/image.png]

It is true that this is a rather subtle debate

Im new here at steemit .. can somebody help me. How this flatform works. And what is the simpiest meaning of bitcoin and how to earn it ?

Thank in advanced for those who will answer me :)

You have a lot of tough decisions here. Perhaps anyone who comments should be awarded some crypto... you know...for outside consultant work LOL share the wealth

[IMAGE: https://steemitimages.com/DQmU2CrpHacKKPb9d2nc1QoqAmWRto3JxsKYYtV7jegsdLU/image.png]

$5,000 a month is a below-average salary for Software employees in many parts of North America. You will risk missing out on talent because of this - I know you don't want to get people who are only interested in money, but that's what an interview process is for.

A tiered system might work out better, where similar jobs are paid at a similar level (IE: all marketing get X, all software get Y, all HR get Z). Not all positions are created equal, and paying everyone the same amount (regardless of position) can lead to friction.

Just some thoughts! I don't mean to rain on your parade. Best of luck in your new endeavor!

I made a post below that was similar to this, but missed yours. I mentioned job family defined pay just for that reason. I also forgot to mention that I would rather see a monthly salary of 10k since taxes take quite a bit of that as it is!

everything you post is right but is not that easy in here.a specially if you just got started ..i still will upvote cos i like it

Good

That is great .

Interesting approach to universal basic income.

Congratulations @furion!
Your post was mentioned in my hit parade in the following categories:

• Upvotes - Ranked 5 with 824 upvotes
• Pending payout - Ranked 4 with $ 1345,57

Your avatar is Nature Prophet from Dota 2!? Keep it up!

Free buffet and beer everyday.

Good post

I need help

>Furion can you help me and share my last publication ?

I have lost a lot of money the last month and I need help!!
[IMAGE: https://img.esteem.ws/bppc6rdzkl.jpg]
*My mother can't help me for ever... *

I'm not a fake please help me !!

thanks a lot for flowing me

This basically describes a socialist system, which has been proven it doesn't work. In this case, it doesn't work because the value that each person/function brings to the venture is not the same (e.g., think of a highly skilled software engineer vs. a entry-level marketing communications manager). It also doesn't work because if there are no incentives then everyone starts to slack.

Its a good idea that with a few adjustments could work.
Here is what I think, (I've been in business for the last 35 years)
If you don't have any extra pay, bonus, or benefits for the founders, why would there be anyone want to do a start up project or company. Thats why founder are founders, they put up the money, they do all the initial leg work and ground work to get the project or company off the ground. So if they are not going to be compensated for that they have no intensive to start. Just my 2 cents, and its great to have ideas like this.

Best way to pay ourselves is to sell the product and make the profit!! :D

Do investors get a larger share? If not, why would they invest and where is the salaries money coming from?

@furion very very good post i agree brother

Excellent work,thank you for sharing

Tnx for info :-)

$5,000 for every one a month is an ideal idea that makes it impossible to make it happen. Where do you think we should start from where in this platform?

agree. follow me i will follow you

Sounds good in theory but there needs to be a leader(good or bad) to direct. I think incentive based bonuses are a plus and pay equal is a big plus. But you must establish a firm leader and let that person guide the team.
Also you may want to have a group of business leaders outside of the business to give direction for hiring and firing and overall employee processes.

Interesting idea but a consensus form of opinions could kill morale. You are assuming everyone is fair, people overvalue their own contributions and undermine others.

God is great...😚😙

Coming, back to this to write more lol because my brain just keeps going... Not sure if anyone stated this already, but how would sales commissions work?

Followed! Love how you start off..."I have no idea what I'm talking about" 😂 I think 99% of people talking talking about the crypto works, doesn't REALLY what they're talking about. Lol

Cool cartoon

Not everybody's qualifications and experience same, which would interpret in quality and efficiency of their work. Sound good when there is no competition to worry about in space. But once there is competition and success depends on better quality and efficiency, it will make extremely hard to attract people with better experiences and qualifications.
Nice post.

This is why i love Steemit. It's the best way to evaluate yourself. If you come with good and valuable content, you will be valued with money. This should be also the case in real life. The valuable content you provide should have a corresponding reward.

Yes founders should be paid for creating something that will have an impact on many others. Small and continuous but something. Also, that socialist approach wont fly but you can consider a pay on achievement level. This gives results as well as incentive. Accomplish level C receive X accomplish level B receive X+ and level A X++This can be a level of knowledge as well as a number of portions of completed team projects. The management, extracted from the A++ ee's because it takes a serious management team to manage performance on project knowledge and project completion. There are A,B and C level teams. EE goal is to move as quickly as possible to the more seasoned A team roster. Managers are paid a percentage of the team total salary. Teams are paid 50% through to successful completion and the remaining 50% on completion as a retroactive lump sum. Setting project goals through an understanding of Company Goals is essential. The Key is motovation through the entire company towards GOAL.

And finally the Author of this comment is upvoted and paid well for commenting :)

New here today, Awesome post bud.

So who would be in charge of distributing all that money?! I don't think universal/equal pay is a good idea. There are always people thirsty of power and money....@furion.

Beautiful informative yet different skills might become unfair, but I believe that if the content somehow adds value to a part of people hence it would not be unfair, it all depends on how you look.

It was very informative, for as long as it was translated by my translator. Thank you.

Please vote me yes

its generally a good system, but it would be hard to get it to be effective right away without stronger chain of command

Good question. If the person in leadership position is doing a good job, more people will dedicate their shares to that person, thus resulting in higher proportion of a bonus.
Ty!

Everyone getting paid the same is called socialism and it does not work well. It's stagnate there is no reason to better yourself or challenge yourself. You pick up trash you get paid 5k a month you do surgery you get paid 5k a month. Whats the point?

The same would apply here, why would I want to do more work and be paid the same other then out of the kindness of my heart (which don't get me wrong is a good thing) but it just does not work :/

I feel that the best way to share the voting power or the money made by the company should be by shearing it according to position in the company and the amount of work done by each individual.

Depending on the size of the company, some things just seem unavoidable, such as politicking. Maybe a dozen people can all get along fairly, but it is near impossible to not have some strife between coworkers at all different levels of the field as more people are added. At the end of the day it's up to you guys to decide on the model, but some of the goals are utopian at best. Different positions require different skills and/or knowledge with added difficulty, thus making certain people start thinking they deserve more.

Wow, so many different views and while reading through the comments I saw things on both sides of the table that could be good. This is one of those posts you have to ponder on for some time. Very good!

End of the CEO packages .... they wouldn't be able to add multiple zeros to the $5000.

I like the concept, but do have a few improvements to offer in my point of view. I think that everyone in the same job family should be paid the same in order to solve the problem of seniority and status to no longer have an impact.

This is because an administrative assistant should not be paid the same as an engineer or manager. Not because they are smarter or more important, but that they have a higher quality education that costs a lot more. Else you will have people skipping college and applying for data entry jobs or people tracking inventory in a warehouse environment.

Not to say any of these positions are not fulfilling and honorable, but that there are people in the company who simply have a more valuable affect on the company that will always translate to dollars, reputation, viability, etc.

Again, not to say that certain people are insignificant in any way, but that there are more valuable assets in the company that happen to usually make more money. Thoughts?

That wouldn't be fair I guess .People who work hard should not get paied the same as people who doesn't.

great work

great idea 👍

Some of your ideas are really great mate....

Interesting read...

It's sounds good, Just the problem is more money people earn, much higher their living standarts get most of the time. So after all 5000$ still wouldn't be enough for most people... (might be wrong ). But let's discuss :)

communism

you have explained the techniques details of how to get $500 0 a month
I use cloud mining to easy get my 5k http://bit.ly/2sY44Vg
use this code for discount 5ZEQWb and i will use yours on return of serve

Sometimes it is a team work. With current society, no one willing to share equally. And, this will never change for decade.

Pay the employees at the market rate for their skills and don't pay the "shareholders" of the company. The shareholders have a stake in the company and shouldn't be taking salaries until the company is profitable on its own. If they need money to eat they can take the minimum possible, like 600 USD a month.

Offer everyone a percentage 0.5% for everyone. The better the product does the better we all do. Keeps everyone working hard, focused and motivated to do better.

goooooooooooooooooooood

Is there a chain of command? or is everyone equal? The higher the person is on the chain of command should receive more voting power.

Sounds like a great idea... Leaders will be equal to everyone so there will be no power trip

thank you very much for your help @surpassinggoogle

I do like the idea that everyone must be paid the same amount of money. But then different people in the organization do different work that requires different skills and people are not machines, they bring in their years of experience and hard work.

Why should someone with ten years of eperience be paid the same as a young fresher who is just out of college and does not have the required eperience.

What I feel is people must be paid according to their skills, experience and the amount of value they bring in to the company.

Another thing that I feel must be tested out in Silicon vally is hourly

Saying everyone should be paid the same is a lot like suddenly claiming all crypto coins are worth the same! You can stomp your feet and pretend all you want about it, but the reality is that different skill sets hold different values.

Can I have $5000 please please please
Best Regards Andrew

Good post!! :D

I love your idea on the whole paying everyone equally thing but about the founders also earning through contributing the way we do, i disagree with you a little bit there.
This is just my opinon, i believe if someone is able to come up with something as brilliant as this platform , such induvidual should be the one to decide whether to be as involved as we all are , or sit back and enjoy the fruits of their labour because they have also worked probably harder than what some of us will do to get rewards here..
But hey, that is just my honest opinon

a thought provoking theory....hey guys,still a newbie,and you know it can be frustrating posting and not much votes,i need followers if you don't mind. peace..

The comments are mainstream. Equal pay for equal work. Except not all work is equal. Without a decision making hierarchy does the project stall? So maybe the answer is to award pay based on the decision making function. Interesting arguments all around.

A flat pay for everyone doesn't seem to work. A Sr developer would earn just as much as the custodian, or the single parent who calls in everyday gets the same pay while everyone else has to pick up the slack. Its going to seriously discourage talented employees and the employees you'd like to keep most will move on, increasing your overhead and rollover costs-possibly missing development deadlines too.

Abolish the voting based distribution system, that will likely lead to office infighting, and favoritism, and law suits.

If the firms founder can't handle basics of HR, it is questionable to the extent that he can maximize the profits of his company. It might be better for the founder to retain ownership of the firm with veto powers, but to someone with real executive or managerial talent run the company.

As far as pay, move your workers overseas. If you need a marketing in the US to work with clients, then keep a few in the US. Your workers will be able to take home far more money if they work out of the USA. If the place you move to is rural enough, there won't be anyone/where else local they can work for.

ohh hell yes my man, keep posting like this i really enjoy this kind of content, keep it up and PEACE

A few quick thoughts. Why would you exclude founders from having extra stake in the company they originally created? They started something, often using own money and time, and should be compensated for this.
And I have a serious issue with the "same pay for all" idea. There are skills which are rare, e.g. finding a programmer with solid blockchain skills is virtually impossible if they only receive a fixed amount per month and some bonus, while someone with a more common skill would be more than happy with this.

I think this idea is a bit naive, sorry ;-)

OK, question: Your company grows up and you hire more employees. Do the new ones get the same terms as the initial team?

Thanks for the raising this great question @furion! As a total noob here, this helps tremedously with my whole STEEMIT thought process.

I like your reasoning. Creative. I vote and follow.

Wow, what a great idea... I'm keen on this
That's a yes from me

a good post !

Nice bro

A very good post that explains much. Thank you

Good quality post, Thanks for sharing and keep steem then we can get good info from you

This comment has received a 0.07 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @hamzaoui.

Stick to the solopreneur, pal! If you´re a lone wolf, you´re a lone wolf! Your company, and the rest are employees, and you decide how much you pay them if you want them to stay with you.

It seems like it would work, as well as the length of work must be taken into account in that regard,
I hope it will be better

I am a little different thinker just think about if everyone grts an equal salary then why would someone educat himself more to get a good seat? there will be no difference in between non educated middle educated and highly educated
all will be equalbecause of salary no one will work hard enough and no compitision occurs
I am in favor of increased salary by the way. as you mentioned at least 5000$ is what all get