Profit share

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Tue, 09 Apr 2019 14:59:54 GMT

Er, your point being??

But to revert.....

It is more sensible to pay vets [or any employee] on what they do, if measurable, although even that can be manipulated, than by hours of attendance, or fees generated, which is the usual way, if any, to measure emolument.

RE: Profit share

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 09 Apr 2019 14:53:59 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Maybe vet A is giving the good advice as well as the descaling and vet B just gives the advice and the tartar increases, as I and the clients sometimes observed?[/quote]

Yeah, could be, probably does. I was just using a rather silly example to make my point that the better veterinary surgeon might not be the one flogging the most "procedures" or the most pills..

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Why do human dentists have hygenists now, who sometimes advise a visit annually, and scrape away religiously, and regularly?[/quote]

I couldn't say for sure, I only treat cats and dogs and horses and rabbits and cavies and chinchillas.

But i can tell you I go for a routine dental appointment twice a year and sit in a chair without GA while the dentist examines my mouth and then congratulates me on my good oral hygiene.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Tue, 09 Apr 2019 09:59:06 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]Possibly vet B is doing the better job. He might be giving superb advice to clients so that they manage to maintain good oral hygiene. While vet A might be booking in everything with a bit of a calculus for "a dental"; he might even be recommending the ghastly "annual routine dental".[/quote]

Gee, entrenched views are not only with dinovets.....

Maybe vet A is giving the good advice as well as the descaling and vet B just gives the advice and the tartar increases, as I and the clients sometimes observed?

Why do human dentists have hygenists now, who sometimes advise a visit annually, and scrape away religiously, and regularly?

RE: Profit share

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 09 Apr 2019 01:25:34 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]If vet A manages to do x dentals per i00 contacts [not consults!*], for example, and vet b does 0.1 x per 100 consults who should be paid more? Who is doing the job better?[/quote]

Possibly vet B is doing the better job. He might be giving superb advice to clients so that they manage to maintain good oral hygiene. While vet A might be booking in everything with a bit of a calculus for "a dental"; he might even be recommending the ghastly "annual routine dental".

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]As someone said a long time ago "if you don't measure you can't manage".[/quote] Yeah, that old bumper-sticker. It's been around so long it's become axiomatic. It's not actually true.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Mon, 08 Apr 2019 17:09:19 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"]

what I’ve noticed is that these ideas, whilst ok in the thought and divisive in execution, tend to then lead to selective choice of work whereby the bone-man selects even more and rejects the lesser-paid - er- mundane jobs, all of which leads to disgruntlement. At the coalface.

It is something I have always counselled against, long-term.

[/quote]

You have a valid point, but gross variance is obvious and it is easy to spot so you can say to an employee you are doing X% [of say microchips] yet the practice average is Y% and vet A manages to do z%.

[Probably the idea would only apply to a practice with branches where every vet did almost all procedures and referral within the practice was less or none.]

We had a very good orthopod who hated dentals and the figures proved it!

etc. etc.

This remuneration method, over about 15 years, didn't incite any criticism 'cos the facts spoke for themselves and were inarguable.

In this day of work/life balance and other commitments it gives a measure of what each vet [and the boss] actually does so that renumeration can be based on facts and not impressions.

It helped vets follow cases through too.

I am sure there are many vets paid less or more than their colleagues but not based, actually, on what they do.

I worked with a guy who "never was available" for house-calls...........

It also avoids any hint of gender, or any other bias, as vets are paid on what they do rather like solicitors and "billable hours".

As someone said a long time ago "if you don't measure you can't manage".

RE: Profit share

George Cooper — Mon, 08 Apr 2019 16:14:55 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[quote user="George Cooper"]
They become "routine", expected, the norm,[/quote]

Not when they are based purely on what each vet does, as I have laboriously tried to explain!

[/quote]

It is something I have always counselled against, long-term.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 17:44:07 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"]Sorry TT - not in my experience!![/quote]

Can you expand or elaborate please, because if the parameters between vets are measured the differences, independent of gender "ability" or experience are staggering and surprising in my experience.

And the differences are not based on charges but on good things not done, sometimes nearly never.....

RE: Profit share

George Cooper — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 17:39:44 GMT

Sorry TT - not in my experience!!

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 17:21:36 GMT

[quote user="George Cooper"]
They become "routine", expected, the norm,[/quote]

Not when they are based purely on what each vet does, as I have laboriously tried to explain!

RE: Profit share

George Cooper — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 17:15:05 GMT

Profit shares, Bonus earned, Shares - all tend to lead to the very same conclusion.

They become "routine", expected, the norm, and as such they are divisive and a source of disharmony, because vets will always dissect the system and apply differing values to the decisions made by management.

Far fairer in my experience is to pay a bonus on everything across the board divided between all vets.

OR pay a decent salary to start with.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 16:38:07 GMT

[quote user="Sarah Keir"]You will need to know your turnover and how that relates to who and how you will judged against. The practice must be open and transparent with these figures (they can be anonomised) but if they are not and your income is going to be largely based on this, I would be cautious.[/quote]

The numbers were fully transparent, both the mechanism and the various figures which thus prevents any question of bias, whether gender or whatever.

The £££s weren't though but could be calculated but. as the logic of payment was sound. we had no complaints.

If vet A manages to do x dentals per i00 contacts [not consults!*], for example, and vet b does 0.1 x per 100 consults who should be paid more? Who is doing the job better?

If vet C can only do 3 C/Ss in a morning why should he/she be paid more. or even the same. as vet D who manages 5 and a pyo....?

Eliminates gender, or personality, or anything.....

It also encourages the initial vet to follow cases through.

Totally avoids any bias; we had no complaints from anyone, ever, except from one vet who engineered the more profitable procedures for not long!!

* "contacts" = opportunities to assess or advise clients eg worming when boosting, microchipping on vaccination or spaying etc.

RE: Profit share

Sarah Keir — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 16:04:57 GMT

You will need to know your turnover and how that relates to who and how you will judged against. The practice must be open and transparent with these figures (they can be anonomised) but if they are not and your income is going to be largely based on this, I would be cautious.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 13:00:33 GMT

[quote user="Liz Barton"]This wouldn't have worked well for me as I was primarily the imager in the practice[/quote]

This is easy to set up as you should/would have got a higher bonus rate for imaging as would orthos etc. versus cat spays etc.

PS The hard part [for the practice owner] would be to get necessary, in the medical sense, things done or booked. We found some vets did many fewer Xrays or bloods than others, for example so getting vets to book imaging should be "bonused" as were dentals and Xrays.

Works well for, logically routine good practice like wormers dentals etc.

Some vets hated dentals and never advise microchips etc etc.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 12:53:40 GMT

[quote user="Jill Butterworth"]Bonus schemes can be tricky[/quote]

As I said, but mine worked for some years with no moans or bias [with one exception which was easy to spot].

PM me and I'll explain it more, if you want, as the differences in parameters between vets, and therefore good medicine and/or service, varied enormously,

RE: Profit share

Jill Butterworth — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 12:19:08 GMT

Bonus schemes can be tricky to administer fairly because it has to be decided whether to have a shared scheme, aiming to make the team pull together and work harder (sell more), with a downside of making people resentful of 'lazy' colleagues, or an individual bonus scheme. The latter works well, but can make staff very anxious to ensure that services and purchases are marked in their name so that they do not lose out, and so can interfere with a team ethos because people become annoyed when for example someone else 'takes over' a case or a nurse writes up the records and misrecords the vet.

Individuals motivated by money and excellent at selling can achieve great bonuses but become a bit driven and psycho to work with!

There are pros and cons to both methods. The amount or percentage offered may not be up for discussion, only the method of division, so have a good think about what motivates and demotivates you and your team, and what will be fairest. It won't be perfect, so perhaps ask if it can be reviewed after a period.

RE: Profit share

Liz Barton — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 12:17:52 GMT

Are they offering full profit share or incremental profit share i.e. just a proportion of what you personally add to the profit.

This wouldn't have worked well for me as I was primarily the imager in the practice while another vet did all the orthopaedics. 2 hours of scans earns a lot less then 2 hours of ortho surgery, but is just as valuable in terms of keeping cases in house and offering clients a full service.

RE: Profit share

Anthony Todd — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 11:00:22 GMT

[quote user="Alexa Bardell"]profit share[/quote]

The only fair way to pay vets, IMHO. Gets round the discrimination or "opinion" usual method and totally eliminates gender bias.

Needs careful criteria and measurement but can work well.