Haute Lumière

Commerce · I.06 · MMXXVI · daylight

La Bourse  /  Volume I  /  Nº I.06  /  Workbook — the Gainshare employee

WORKBOOK — THE LUMINOUS GAINSHARE EMPLOYEE

Chapter I.06 · Bringing the Money With You

For the person working inside a gainshare arrangement — where a defined share of verified improvement returns to the people who created it. This chapter is about capital, which sounds like somebody else's department. It is not. The capital structure decides what your share is computed against, and almost nobody on the floor has ever read it.

---

WHY CAPITAL IS YOUR BUSINESS

A gainshare pays a share of verified improvement. Improvement is measured against a baseline, and a baseline is built out of the numbers the firm is already carrying — including its financing costs.

So the structure of the firm's capital reaches your pay slip by three routes, and all three are worth an hour of your attention:

1. Interest is usually inside the measure. If your scheme computes gain net of financing cost, then a cheaper capital stack produces gain without anybody on the floor doing anything, and an expensive one eats gain you did create.
2. Capital decides whether the improvement can be made at all. The change your team can see — the repair rather than replace, the reuse line, the tool that pays back in three years — needs funding on a term that matches its payback. Financed on a two-year facility, a four-year payback shows up as a loss and gets cancelled in year two.
3. You may be entitled to a position in the stack. Employee capital — deferred gainshare, an employee note programme, a share of the reserve — is a real and cheap source of patient money, and firms very rarely think to offer it because nobody has asked.

The single most valuable thing you can do this quarter is find out whether your gain is computed gross or net of financing cost. Most people do not know, and it is frequently worth more than any operational improvement they will make this year.

---

PART ONE — DISCOVERY

Days 1–30: find out what your gain is measured against

Exercise 1.1 — Read your own measure, line by line (2 hours)

Take the scheme document, not the summary leaflet, and answer in writing:

1. Is gain computed gross or net of financing cost? Find the sentence.
2. If net, which financing cost — the facility that funded the improvement, or a notional charge on all capital employed?
3. Is the charge a real rate quoted by a real lender, or an internal hurdle rate set by head office?
4. What happens to the measure if the firm refinances more cheaply — does the gain rise, and does your share rise with it?
5. What happens if it refinances more expensively?

Question three is where the money hides. A notional internal charge is a policy choice, not a market price, and it is frequently set two or three hundred basis points above what the firm actually pays. On a $5 million improvement, 250 basis points of notional over-charge is $125,000 a year of gain that never existed and was never shared.

If nobody can answer question three, that is your finding, and it is worth more than anything else in this workbook.

Exercise 1.2 — Find the improvement that capital is blocking (one week)

Your team can see things the capital allocation committee cannot. Sweep for the improvement that is refused for a financing reason rather than an operational one.

Every one of those five is a structure problem wearing an operations answer, and every one has an instrument in Chapter I.06 that addresses it. Write down three real examples from your own floor and which row each belongs in.

Exercise 1.3 — The appreciative capital conversation (45 minutes, with your team)

Run this, in these words:

"Think of a time here when something got funded that we did not expect to get funded. What made it possible? Who argued for it? What did they say?"

Take notes on the conditions, not the outcome. You are building a map of what actually gets approved in this firm — which is a different map from the one in the capital policy, and far more useful.

---

PART TWO — THE ARITHMETIC

Days 31–45: compute what the structure is doing to your share

Exercise 2.1 — The financing wedge in your own gain (90 minutes)

If your scheme computes net of financing cost, compute the wedge.

  gain, gross                                    $
  financing charge applied                       $
  gain, net (what your share is computed on)     $
  your share %                                   %
  your share                                     $

  now recompute with the firm's ACTUAL cost of debt
  gain, net, at the real rate                    $
  your share at the real rate                    $
  the difference                                 $

That difference is the price of an accounting convention, and it is paid entirely by you. It is also entirely arguable, in a way that "we should get more" is not.

Exercise 2.2 — Price the improvement your team wants (2 hours)

Take the best of the three blocked improvements from Exercise 1.2 and price it the way the chapter prices a facility.

  cost of the improvement                        $
  annual saving, verified method                 $
  simple payback                              years
  ---------------------------------------------------
  if financed at the firm's real cost of debt:
    annual financing cost                        $
    net annual gain                              $
    your team's share                            $

Then compute it again on a term that matches the payback. Most blocked improvements are not uneconomic; they are mis-financed, and the page that shows this is short.

Exercise 2.3 — The employee tranche (90 minutes)

Here is the position almost nobody asks for, and it is the most interesting idea in this workbook.

Employee capital is patient capital. It is the cheapest and most aligned money in any firm, and its providers are the people most able to verify what it is spent on.

  deferred gainshare, held one year          $
  at a stated coupon of 3%                   $  per year
  in exchange for: a defined term, a stated position
  in the waterfall, and a written verification right

Compute what your team's deferred gainshare would be worth as a subordinated tranche: the amount, the coupon, the term. Then compare it to what the firm pays for subordinated debt externally. If the firm is paying eight percent outside for money its own people would provide at three, that is a live, computable proposal — and it is one of the very few proposals that improves the firm's economics and the employees' position simultaneously.

The conditions to insist on, all three, in writing:

1. A stated position in the waterfall. Not "we'll look after you."
2. A defined term and a date. Deferred compensation without a date is not capital, it is an unsecured promise.
3. A verification right. You get to see the computation, annually.

---

PART THREE — DESIGN

Days 46–70: make the structure visible, then make it fair

Exercise 3.1 — The one-page capital explainer (one week)

Write, for your own team, the page nobody has written: how this firm is financed, and how that reaches our pay.

  where our money comes from      amount     cost     who ranks first
  ----------------------------------------------------------------
  senior debt                                          last to lose
  subordinated / other                                 second
  equity                                               first to lose
  ----------------------------------------------------------------
  blended cost of funds                        %
  the charge applied to our gain               %
  the difference                             bps

Circulate it. You will find that people who have worked somewhere fifteen years have never seen it, and that the conversation it starts is a more serious one than any engagement survey has ever produced.

Exercise 3.2 — The ratchet question (one meeting)

If your firm carries a sustainability-linked facility, ask three questions:

1. What is the ratchet, in basis points?
2. What is average utilisation of the facility?
3. What does the reporting cost — assurance fees plus internal hours?

Then compute: benefit = facility × ratchet × utilisation, against cost.

If the firm is below break-even it is spending money to produce a discount smaller than the spend, and some of that spend is your team's hours, recorded somewhere as overhead that reduces the gain you are measured on. This is a legitimate, quantified, entirely unsentimental thing to raise, and it is the sort of finding that changes how a floor is listened to.

Exercise 3.3 — Make an uncounted gain countable (ongoing)

An uncounted gain is not shared. The highest-leverage work available to you is turning something your team knows into something the measure can see.

For each of the three candidates from Exercise 1.2, write:

1. The metric, defined so two people compute it identically.
2. The baseline period, long enough to contain normal variation.
3. The method of measurement, written down.
4. The verifier, named.
5. Where it enters the gainshare formula — and if it does not, what would have to change for it to.

Point five is the one that matters. A metric that is measured but sits outside the formula is a metric that will be praised and not paid.

---

PART FOUR — DESTINY AND DELIGHT

Days 71–90: make it hold

Exercise 4.1 — Baseline protection, in the capital era (45 minutes)

Chapter I.01's warning applies with extra force here. If the baseline resets to the improved level each period, every gain raises the bar you are measured against.

The capital version of the same trap: if the financing charge in your measure is reset annually to the firm's current cost of debt, you carry the interest rate cycle personally. A rate rise you did not cause reduces your gain.

Ask for one of two things, in writing:

• The financing charge is fixed for the term of the facility that funded the improvement, or
• It tracks the actual facility rate, so that if the firm refinances more cheaply the gain rises and your share rises with it.

Either is defensible. What is not defensible is a charge that rises with rates and does not fall with refinancing, and that asymmetry is common enough to be worth checking for by name.

Exercise 4.2 — The second owner (this month)

One person who understands the capital structure is a curiosity. Two is a practice.

Teach the one-page explainer from Exercise 3.1 to one colleague until they can draw it from memory. Give them the credit for the first finding it produces. The finding will outlive your role in a way that it cannot if only you can explain it.

Exercise 4.3 — Delight, on purpose (ongoing)

There is a particular and lasting pleasure in the meeting where you ask what the ratchet is and nobody in the room knows — and then, two weeks later, everybody does, because you found out and wrote it down.

It is not the pleasure of being right. It is the pleasure of a thing becoming legible that was opaque for years, and of watching people use your page in arguments you are not in.

Write one sentence: the part of this I look forward to is ___. If you cannot complete it, you are doing this as a grievance rather than as craft, and grievance has a much shorter half-life than curiosity does.

---

KNOW YOUR STRUCTURE — A CHECKLIST

Answer every line. An unanswered line is a finding.

The last two decide whether you are a capital provider or a creditor with no documents. They are also the two most likely to be missing, and the two most readily fixed, because fixing them costs the firm nothing.

---

THE CONVERSATION, SCRIPTED

For the meeting where you raise this. Four moves, in this order, and no others.

One — open on the structure, not the grievance.

"I've been reading how the facility is priced. I want to check one thing about how it reaches our measure."

Two — ask the factual question, and stop talking.

"Is the financing charge in our gain calculation the actual rate we pay, or an internal hurdle? And is it fixed for the term or reset each year?"

Three — put the arithmetic on the table, once.

"If it's the internal hurdle, the difference against the real rate is about [x] basis points, which on our book is [$y] a year of gain. I'm not asking for a decision today — I'd like to know which it is."

Four — offer the trade.

"And separately: our team's deferred gainshare is about [$z]. If it had a stated position and a date, that's subordinated capital at three percent against the eight you're paying outside. I'd like to put that on paper."

What makes this work is that every sentence is a question about a document. Nobody has to defend a value, nobody has to concede a principle, and the answer either exists in writing or it does not — and if it does not, you have found something real and the firm now owes you the finding.

---

APPRECIATIVE QUESTIONS FOR YOUR TEAM

1. When has something been funded here that we expected to be refused? What made it possible, and who said what?
2. What do we know about the cost of things on this floor that nobody upstairs could know — and which of those is currently uncounted?
3. Which improvement have we been told does not pay back, that would pay back comfortably on a longer term? What would it take to test that?
4. If our deferred gainshare had a stated position and a date, what would we want it invested in first?
5. What is already working about how this team gets things approved — and what would it take to have more of that?