Promotional Guidelines - WorldatWork · 2017-03-01 · Promotional Guidelines WorldatWork 6 Executive Summary While many aspects of promotional practices are largely unchanged from

Promotional Guidelines

WorldatWork

February 2015

About WorldatWork® – The Total Rewards Association

WorldatWork (www.worldatwork.org) is a nonprofit human resources association for

professionals and organizations focused on compensation, benefits, work-life effec-

tiveness and total rewards – strategies to attract, motivate and retain an engaged and

productive workforce. WorldatWork and its affiliates provide comprehensive education,

certification, research, advocacy and community, enhancing careers of professionals

and, ultimately, achieving better results for the organizations they serve. WorldatWork

has more than 65,000 members and subscribers worldwide; 95 percent of Fortune 500

companies employ a WorldatWork member. Founded in 1955, WorldaWork is affiliated

with more than 70 local human resources associations and has offices in Scottsdale,

Ariz., and Washington, D.C.

WorldatWork Society of Certified Professionals® is the certifying body for six presti-

gious designations: the Certified Compensation Professional® (CCP®), Certified Benefits

Professional® (CBP), Global Remuneration Professional (GRP®), Work-Life Certified

Professional® (WLCP®), Certified Sales Compensation Professional (CSCP)™ and

Certified Executive Compensation Professional (CECP)™.

The WorldatWork group of registered marks also includes: Alliance for Work-Life

Progress or AWLP, workspan and WorldatWork Journal.

Contact:

WorldatWork Customer Relations

14040 N. Northsight Blvd.

Scottsdale, Arizona USA

85260-3601

Toll free: 877-951-9191

Fax 480-483-8352

[email protected]

©2014 WorldatWork Any laws, regulations or other legal requirements noted in this publication are, to the best of the publisher’s knowledge, accurate and current

as of this report’s publishing date. WorldatWork is providing this information with the understanding that WorldatWork is not engaged, directly or by implication, in

rendering legal, accounting or other related professional services. You are urged to consult with an attorney, accountant or other qualified professional concerning

your own specific situation and any questions that you may have related to that.

No portion of this publication may be reproduced in any form without express written permission from WorldatWork.

Promotional Guidelines WorldatWork 1

Introduction & Methodology

This report summarizes the results of a November 2014 survey of WorldatWork members to gather information

about current trends in promotional guidelines. This survey focuses on a variety of practices and policies,

including what employers consider to be promotions as well as the standard pay increases that often accompany

promotions.

On Nov. 12, 2014, survey invitations were sent electronically to 4,989 WorldatWork members. Randomly

selected members had designated compensation only or compensation and benefits as their primary job function

in their WorldatWork member profile. The survey closed on Dec. 12, 2014, with 541 responses, an 11% response

rate. The dataset was cleaned, resulting in a final dataset of 443 responses.

In order to provide the most accurate data possible, the data was cleaned and analyzed using statistical software.

Any duplicate records were removed. Data comparisons with any relevant, statistically significant differences are

noted within this report.

The demographics of the survey sample and the respondents are similar to the WorldatWork membership as a

whole. The typical WorldatWork member works at the managerial level or higher in the headquarters of a large

company in North America.

The frequencies or response distributions listed in the report show the number of times or percentage of times a

value appears in a dataset. Due to rounding, frequencies of data responses provided in this survey may not total

exactly 100%.

WorldatWork conducted similar promotional guidelines surveys in 2012, 2010 and 2006. The reports can be

viewed on the WorldatWork website. Many historical comparisons from 2012 and 2010 are illustrated in this

report; however, the 2006 data is not shown in this report due to various changes in questions and limited space.

Please visit the WorldatWork website to view the 2006 data in its entirety.

http://www.worldatwork.org/Content/research/html/research-home.jsp


Table of Figures

Demographics

Figure 1: Sector ................................................................................................................................................ 4

Figure 2: Organization size .............................................................................................................................. 4

Figure 3: Industry ............................................................................................................................................. 5

Figure 4: Region ............................................................................................................................................... 5

Definition of Promotion

Figure 5: Promotion definitions and criteria ................................................................................................... 9

Size and Determination of Promotional Increases

Figure 6: Average promotional increase ......................................................................................................... 9

Figure 7: Influential factor(s) in determining rates of promotional increase .................................................. 10

Number of Promotions

Figure 8: Percentage of employees promoted .................................................................................................. 10

Funding of Promotional Increases

Figure 9: Funding of promotional increases ..................................................................................................... 11

Figure 10: Size limitation on promotional increases ........................................................................................ 11

Figure 11: Maximum amount of promotional increases .................................................................................. 12

Communicating Promotional Guidelines

Figure 12: Communication of promotional guidelines or policies ................................................................... 12

Position Movement

Figure 13: Limitations on grades, levels or bands employees are permitted to move ..................................... 13

Figure 14: Number of grades, bands or levels an employee can move in one promotion ............................... 13

Figure 15: Employee eligibility for an increase when moving laterally .......................................................... 14

Effect of Promotions on Merit Increases and Variable Pay Awards

Figure 16: Management of merit increases for promoted employees ............................................................. 14

Timing and Frequency

Figure 17: When promotions occur .................................................................................................................. 15

Figure 18: Promotion eligibility after an employee is hired............................................................................. 15

Figure 19: Frequency of employee eligibility for a promotion ........................................................................ 16

Figure 20: Calculation of bonuses or incentives after a promotion ................................................................. 17

Promotional Opportunities and Employee Motivation

Figure 21: Promotional opportunities to attract new employees ...................................................................... 17

Figure 22: Effect on employee engagement and motivation ............................................................................ 18

Global Practices


Figure 23: Promotional guidelines or policies designed and administered by global regions ......................... 19

Figure 24: Consistency of promotional guidelines or policies by global regions ............................................ 19

Additional Analysis Comparisons by Sector

Figure 25: Organization sector, by percentage of employees promoted .......................................................... 20

Comparisons by Effect of Promotional Opportunities on Employee Engagement

Figure 26: Communication approach of promotional guidelines or policy, by effect on employee

engagement ...................................................................................................................................................... 21


Demographics

Figure 1: “Your organization is:” (n=371)

Figure 2: “Please choose the total number of full-time employees (FTEs) your organization employs

worldwide:” (n=371)

Option Percentage

Fewer than 100 employees 2%

100 to 499 7%

500 to 999 6%

1,000 to 2,499 16%

2,500 to 4,999 15%

5,000 to 9,999 21%

10,000 to 19,999 15%

20,000 to 39,999 7%

40,000 to 99,999 7%

100,000 or more employees 4%

Public sector17%

Private sector, publicly traded

45%

Private sector,

privately held 22%

Nonprofit/Not-for-profit 15%


Figure 3: “Please choose one category that best describes the industry in which your organization operates:” (n=371)

Industries with less than 2% are not listed in this table.

Option Percentage

All Other Manufacturing 12%

Finance and Insurance 12%

Health Care and Social Assistance 10%

Consulting, Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 8%

Utilities, Oil and Gas 7%

Information (includes Publishing, IT, etc.) 6%

Computer and Electronic Manufacturing 4%

Pharmaceuticals 4%

Public Administration 3%

Retail Trade 3%

Transportation 3%

Educational Services 2%

Other Services (except Public Administration) 2%

Wholesale Trade 2%

Other 18% Figure 4: “For which regions of the world do you have responsibility? (Check all that apply.)” (n=371)

97%

29%

27%

23%

18%

15%

13%

United States/Canada

Asia-Pacific

Western Europe

Latin America

Eastern Europe

Middle East

Africa


Executive Summary

While many aspects of promotional practices are largely unchanged from our past two surveys on this topic in

2012 and 2010, the percentage of employees receiving a promotion has increased by two full points since 2010.

Respondents report that an average of 9% of their employees received a promotion during the past fiscal year.

This is a significant improvement from the 7% reported in 2010 and is further evidence that organizations are

relaxing the purse strings in their pay budgets.

There has been little change however in the average amount of increase that employees are receiving. In

determining promotional increase amounts, organizations continue to consider salary range position and the pay

levels of similarly situated employees as primary determinants. Less than half (42%) budget separately for

promotional activity. The prevalence of this practice appears to be falling as more organizations are either

budgeting for promotions in their merit budget or simply funding with salary or vacancy savings.

Finally, although roughly two-thirds of respondents indicate that they don’t feature or market promotional

opportunities to job candidates, approximately the same percentage believes that promotional activities have a

positive or extremely positive effect on employee engagement and motivation. Moreover, the perceived effect of

promotions on employee engagement increases as the amount of information shared with employees about

promotional opportunities increases, suggesting that improved communications about promotions improves the

efficacy of promotions as a total rewards lever.


Similar to previous survey years, higher-level responsibilities/job (77%) and an increase in pay

grade, band or level (75%) are the top two criteria for defining employee promotion. (See Figure

5.)


The average promotional increases, as a percentage of base pay, were comparable among each

employee category from 2012 and 2010. For nonexempt, hourly employees, increases were 7.6%

of base pay; exempt, salaried employees received average increases of 8.8%; and

officers/executives were allotted 10.1% average increases. (See Figure 6.)

During 2014, the most influential factors in determining rates of promotional increase were: pay

range for a new position (71%) and rates paid to other employees similarly situated within the

organization (60%). These results were similar in 2012 and 2010; however, the factor of pay

range for a new position has improved five percentage points since 2010. (See Figure 7.)


The percentage of employees promoted in 2013 (or last fiscal year) was marginally higher (9.0%)

than those promoted in a typical year (8.8%). This is consistent with findings from 2012 but has

shifted from 2010, when the percentage of employees promoted in that fiscal year was less than a

typical year. (See Figure 8.)


Funding of Promotional Increases

42% of organizations fund promotional increases by budgeting for these separate from other pay

increase budgets, which is down slightly compared to previous years. In addition, 29% of

promotions are funded with vacancy savings (savings from vacant positions or during

recruitment). This source has increased by seven percentage points since 2010. (See Figure 9.)

There is fairly even distribution of organizations’ stances on limiting the size of some or all

promotional increases. Overall, 39% limit some increases; 35% do not limit increases; and 26%

limit all increases. (See Figure 10.)


46% of organizations use the guidelines and policies to direct human resources and management,

communicating with employees when they ask. (See Figure 12.)

Position Movement

Most organizations do not set limits for how many grades, bands or levels employees are

permitted to move in a single promotion (67%). (See Figure 13.) Of the 17% who responded that

there was a limit for moving in a single promotion, more than half of those organizations either

permit one or two grades, bands or levels. (See Figure 14.)

Although most employees typically remain ineligible for lateral promotional increases (47%),

many organizations are moving toward it depending on the position (43%). (See Figure 15.)


Like 2012 and 2010, most organizations manage their merit increases for promoted employees by

making them eligible for the nearest merit increase, though this has declined 13 percentage points

since 2010. (See Figure 16.)

Timing and Frequency

A majority of promotions occur as needed (71%), followed by on an annual basis (16%). (See

Figure 17.)

There is largely no limit or formal policy for how often employees are eligible for a promotion

(58%). (See Figure 19.) Officers/executives have the most flexibility among employee

classifications to be eligible for a promotion after being hired, with no minimum time limit

(62%). However, exempt, salaried (46%) and nonexempt hourly employees (42%) often have no

minimum time requirement for eligibility for promotions either. (See Figure 18.)

Most organizations calculate bonus or incentive payouts for employee promotional increases by

prorating previous and new rates (37%), or just use the new rate of pay and new bonus rate, if

applicable (29%). (See Figure 20.)



Consistent with previous years, over half of organizations do not feature or market their

promotional opportunities or activities as a key employee benefit to attract new employees. (See

Figure 21.)

More than 60% of workforces would consider their organization’s promotional opportunities (or

activities) to have a positive effect on employee engagement and employee motivation. (See

Figure 22.)

Global Practices

42% of organizations say their promotional guidelines are designed primarily at the corporate

level, and all employees generally participate in the same programs, with flexibility for local

countries to make limited adaptations or implement unique programs of nominal cost. This

continues to be the main method global organizations use to design and administer promotional

guidelines or policies, though this has decreased by seven percentage points from 2012. (See

Figure 23.)

Similar to 2012, more than 6 of 10 organizations consistently apply promotional guidelines or

policies to all countries. (See Figure 24.)


Results and Analysis


Figure 5: “Which of the following best describes how your organization defines an employee

“promotion”? Please select all criteria that are REQUIRED to be considered a promotion.”1, 2


Figure 6: “In 2014 (or current fiscal year), what has been the average promotional increase, expressed

as a percentage of base pay, for each employee category in your organization? If the employee category is not applicable for your organization, please leave it blank.”

2010 2012 2014

n % n % n %

Nonexempt (hourly) 504 7.0% 505 7.4% 306 7.6%

Exempt (salaried) 584 8.3% 578 8.7% 355 8.8%

Officers/executives 380 9.5% 383 10.2% 239 10.1%

1 This is the first year the option “Increase in pay” was available. 2 A statistically significant lower number of participants in 2014 reported increase in pay grade, band or level (75%) as criteria required to

be considered a promotion compared with 2010.

77%

75%

39%

35%

2%

2%

76%

81%

36%

n/a

1%

4%

73%

84%

33%

n/a

1%

4%

Higher-level responsibilities/job

Increase in pay grade, band or level

New title

Increase in pay

New department

Other

2014 (n=443) 2012 (n=707) 2010 (n=719)


Figure 7: “During 2014, what has been the most influential factor(s) in determining rates of promotional increase? (Please select up to three factors).”

2010 2012 2014

n= 684 689 428

Pay range for the new position 66% 69% 71%

Rates paid to other employees similarly situated within the organization

60% 60% 60%

External pay data, if available 36% 38% 39%

Qualifications of the individual, compared to the qualifications of other employees in the same job within the organization

30% 27% 32%

Performance level of the individual being promoted 29% 28% 29%

Number of pay grades between the old position and the new position

19% 16% 19%

A fixed percentage increase for most promotional increases 21% 21% 16%

Whether the promotion involves a change from nonexempt to exempt classification

8% 8% 8%


Figure 8: Percentage of employees promoted in 2013 versus the percentage of employees promoted in

a typical year. “What percentage of employees were promoted in 2013 (or last fiscal year)? Please specify as a

percentage of the number of total employees.”

“What percentage of employees does your organization usually promote on an annual basis? Please specify as a percentage of the number of total employees.”

2010 2012 2014

n= 477 621 382

2013 or last fiscal year from survey date 7.0% 8.4% 9.0%

Typical year 8.1% 8.3% 8.8%


Funding

Figure 9: “How does your organization fund promotional increases? Check all that apply.”

2010 2012 2014

n= 600 587 372

We budget for promotional increases separate from other pay increase budgets. 44% 43% 42%

We pay for promotional increases with vacancy savings (savings from vacant positions or during recruitment).

22% 28% 29%

We budget for promotional increases as part of our merit budget. 24% 18% 22%

We pay for promotional increases with salary savings (hiring at a lower rate than the previous incumbent).

16% 17% 19%

We pay for promotional increases out of our merit budget, but the merit budget is not inflated to cover promotional increases.

13% 16% 15%

We budget for promotional increases as part of another budget. Please specify budget:

13% 12% 12%

We pay for promotional increases out of another budget, but the other budget is not inflated to cover promotional increases.

8% 7% 6%

Responses submitted under “we budget for promotional increases as part of another, please specify the budget” largely indicated department budgets, followed by salary budgets and adjustments.

Figure 10: “Does your organization limit the size of some or all promotional increases?”

26%

35%

39%

25%

37% 38%

27%

33%

40%

Yes, all promotional increasesare limited.

No, promotional increases are notlimited.

Some promotional increases arelimited.

2014 (n=375) 2012 (n=603) 2010 (n=624)


Figure 11: “What is the maximum amount employees are eligible for as a promotional increase? Please choose the most accurate response for each employee category.” Only participants who answered “yes” in Figure 10 received this question.

Less than 10%

11%-20%

21%-30%

31%-40%

41%-50%

More than 50%

No limit for this type of employee

Nonexempt (hourly) (n=85) 38% 47% 4% 0% 0% 4% 8%

Exempt (salaried) (n=94) 34% 50% 5% 0% 0% 3% 7%

Officers/executives (n=86) 22% 43% 11% 0% 0% 4% 21%


Figure 12: “What is your organization’s approach to the communication of promotional guidelines or policy?”3 (n=371)

3 “We do not share the promotional guidelines or policy with employees” was not a choice in previous years.

46%

23%

21%

5%

5%

The guidelines and policy are mostly to guide HRand management; we will share with employees

when they ask.

We want every employee to fully understand theguidelines and policy.

We do not share the promotional guidelines orpolicy with employees.

We communicate the guidelines to employees onlywhen they are involved in a promotion.

Other


Position Movement

Figure 13: “Does your organization set a limit for how many grades, bands or levels employees are

permitted to move in a single promotion?” (n=372)

Figure 14: “How many grades, bands or levels are employees permitted to move in one promotion?” Only

participants who answered “yes” in Figure 13 received this question.

67%

17%

16%

No

Yes

Depends on the employee’s classification

40%43%

5%

13%

53%

31%

3%

13%

57%

36%

3%5%

One Two Three Other

2014 (n=63) 2012 (n=97) 2010 (n=76)


Figure 15: “Are employees typically eligible for a promotional increase when moving laterally?”4


Figure 16: “How are merit increases managed for promoted employees?”5

2010 2012 2014

n= 620 601 443

Promoted employees are eligible for the nearest merit increase. 46% 43% 33%6

Practice varies by employee or manager or is determined on a case-by-case basis.

n/a n/a 24%

The merit increase is included in the promotional increase. 17% 19% 16%

Promoted employees are eligible for a prorated merit increase. 16% 12% 9%

Promoted employees are ineligible for a merit increase until the next cycle.

7% 7% 7%

We do not offer merit increases. n/a n/a 2%

Other 15% 19% 9%

4 A statistically significant lower percentage of participants in 2014 do not typically allow promotional increases for lateral position moves

(47%) compared to 2010. 5 “Practice varies by employee or manager or is determined on a case-by-case basis” was a new option for 2014. 6 A statistically significant lower percentage of participants in 2014 managed merit increases for promoted employees as eligible for the

nearest increase (33%) than in 2010 (46%).

8%

8%

11%

57%

52%

47%

35%

40%

43%

2010 (n=622)

2012 (n=604)

2014 (n=443)

Yes No It depends on the position


Time and Frequency

Figure 17: “When do most promotions in your organization occur?”

Figure 18: “How soon after you hire are employees eligible for a promotion? Please choose an answer

for each employee category.”

No promotions within first …

No minimum; immediate

if necessary

No promotions within first 3 months of service



Not until other

specific days or months

Nonexempt (hourly) (n=347) 42% 5% 22% 28% 3%

Exempt (salaried) (n=366) 46% 3% 18% 28% 4%

Officers/executives (n=329) 62% 3% 11% 21% 3%

71%

16%

9%

2% 3%

72%

19%

7%

1% 2%

74%

17%

6%

1% 2%

As needed Annually Every 6 months Quarterly Other

2014 (n=443) 2012 (n=601) 2010 (n=622)


Figure 19: “How often are employees eligible for promotion?”7

7 This was the first year the option “Depends on employee level or position” was offered.

58%

16%

12%

7%

3%

2%

1%

2%

63%

18%

n/a

9%

2%

2%

1%

6%

59%

16%

n/a

12%

3%

2%

0%

7%

No limit or formal policy

12 months after last promotion

Depends on employee level or position





Other

2014 (n=373) 2012 (n=594) 2010 (n=613)


Figure 20: “How are bonus or incentive payouts calculated for employees who have received a promotional increase?”8


Figure 21: “Does your organization feature or market the promotional opportunities (or activities) as a

key employee benefit when attempting to attract new employees?”

8 “Not applicable; we do not offer bonuses or incentives” was made available for the first time for this survey version.

37%

29%

11%

6%

2%

2%

14%

46%

29%

n/a

5%

1%

2%

18%

43%

29%

n/a

4%

1%

3%

19%

Prorate of previous and new rates

New rate of pay and new bonus rate, if applicable

Not applicable; we do not offer bonuses orincentives

Previous rate of pay and previous bonus rate

Previous rate of pay and new bonus rate

Current rate of pay and previous bonus rate

Other

2014 (n=371) 2012 (n=580) 2010 (n=579)

Yes35%

Yes40%

Yes37%

No66%

No60%

No63%

2010 (n=614)

2012 (n=596)

2014 (n=370)


Figure 22: “What would your workforce say is the effect of your organization’s promotional opportunities (or activities) on:”

6%

4%

5%

35%

34%

33%

59%

63%

62%

2010 (n=610)

2012 (n=590)

2014 (n=368)

Em

plo

ye

e E

ng

ag

em

en

t

Extremely negative/negative effect No effect or neutral Extremely positive/positive effect

6%

4%

5%

33%

30%

31%

62%

66%

64%

2010 (n=610)

2012 (n=590)

2014 (n=368)

Em

plo

ye

e M

oti

va

tio

n


Global Practices

Only participants with responsibility for more than one region or country (see Figure 4) received the following questions. Figure 23: “If you have employees in multiple countries, how are your promotional guidelines or policies

designed and administered?”

Figure 24: “Are your promotional guidelines or policies applied consistently to all countries?”

44%

31%

15%

10%

51%

31%

10%

8%

Promotional guidelines are designed primarily at thecorporate level, and all employees generally

participate in the same programs, with flexibility forlocal countries to make limited adaptations orimplement unique programs of nominal cost.

Promotional guidelines are designed exclusively atthe corporate level, and all employees worldwide

participate in the same programs.

Promotional guidelines are designed andadministered primarily at the local level to ensure

they are meeting the unique needs of localemployees.

Promotional guidelines are designed with significantinput from local HR and/or line management. One or

a few core variable pay programs existcompanywide, however different countries havesignificant latitude to implement additional local

programs.

2014 (n=120) 2012 (n=136)

Yes65%

Yes66%

No35%

No34%

2014 (n=122) 2012 (n=140)


Additional Analysis

Comparisons by Sector

The following section provides a detailed analysis of percentage of promoted employees varying by sector:

Public sector

Private sector

Nonprofit/not-for-profit.

Figure 25: Organization sector, by percentage of employees promoted:

Public Private Nonprofit

n= 64 250 57

2013 or last fiscal year from survey date 9.4% 9.1% 8.5%

Typical year 8.9% 9.1% 8.2%


Comparisons by Effect on Employee Engagement

The following section provides a detailed analysis of the perceived effect of an organization’s promotional

opportunities or activities on employee engagement, according to survey respondents. Employee engagement fell

into the following categories:

Extremely negative/negative effect

No effect or neutral

Extremely positive/positive effect.

Figure 26: Communication approach of promotional guidelines or policy, by effect on employee engagement9:

9 Organizations that reported “We want every employee to fully understand the guidelines and policy” are statistically significantly more

likely to have an extremely positive/positive effect on employee engagement (71%) compared with those that stated “We do not share the

promotional guidelines or policy with employees” (51%).

6%

7%

3%

5%

10%

18%

22%

35%

44%

50%

77%

71%

63%

51%

40%

We communicate the guidelines to employees onlywhen they are involved in a promotion

We want every employee to fully understand theguidelines and policy

The guidelines and policy are mostly to guide humanresources and management; we will share them with

employees when they ask

We do not share the promotional guidelines or policywith employees

Other

Extremely negative/negative (n=18) No effect or neutral (n=123) Extremely positive/positive (n=225)


Participating Organizations

2020

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank

Adecco Group

ADP

Advocate Health Care

AEG (Anschutz Entertainment Group)

AgStar Financial Services

Air Canada

Air Products

Akron General Health System

Alaska Airlines

Alkermes

Allegion

Alliance Data

Allstate Insurance Co.

ALSAC/St. Jude

Amadeus North America

American Dental Association

Ameritas

Amgen Inc.

Andersen

Apptio Inc.

Arlington County Government

ARRIS

Aspen Technology

Astoria Bank

Asurion

ATCO Energy Solutions Ltd.

ATCO Power

ATCO Structures & Logistics

Atmel Corp.

Autodesk

Automatic Data Processing LLC

Babcock & Wilcox

Balfour Beatty Construction US

Banner Health

Bayer Corp.

Baystate Health

Berry Appleman & Leiden

BI Inc.

Black & Veatch

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island

BlueCross BlueShield of South Carolina

BlueLinx Co.

BNSF Railway Co.

Bonfils Blood Center

Bridgestone Europe n.v.

Briggs & Stratton Corp.

Brigham Young University

Bruker Corp.

Build-A-Bear Workshop

Cambia Health Solutions

Cancer Treatment Centers of America

Canon USA

Canon Virginia Inc.

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority

CareerBuilder

Carter's Inc.

CDK Global

Centene Corp.

CenterPoint Energy

CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Co.

CHI Health

Ciena Corp.

Clean Harbors

CME Group

Colgate Palmolive

Colorado PERA

CommScope

Community Coffee Company LLC

County of Kent

County of Riverside

Cree Inc.

CSX Transportation

Cytec Industries Inc.

Daiichi Sankyo Inc.

Dart Container Corp.

Dave & Buster's

Daymon Worldwide

Dealertrack Technologies

Dean Foods

Department of Defense

DLL

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Inc.

Dun and Bradstreet

DynCorp International

Energy Northwest

Ensign Energy

Evonik Corp.

Evraz

Fannie Mae

Farmers Insurance

FedEx Ground

Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc.

FINRA

Florida Blue

FMC Corp.

Follett Corp.

Fort Worth Independent School District

Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady Health System

Freedom Mortgage

Froedtert Health


Frost Bank

FT Services

Fujifilm Medical Systems U.S.A. Inc.

Geisinger Health System

General Atomics

General Dynamics Corporation Gulfstream

Aerospace Corporation

GfK

Glanbia Performance Nutrition

Glu Mobile Inc.

Hackensack University Medical Center

Halcon Resources

Hawaiian Electric Company Inc.

Helen of Troy Limited of Nevada

Henkels & McCoy

Herman Miller Inc.

Hitachi America Ltd.

Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey

HSN

ICON

IHG

IHS

IM Flash Technologies

Insight

Insitu

Institute for Defense Analyses

Integra Life Sciences

INTEGRIS Health

Interactive Intelligence

inVentiv Health

ITC Holdings Corp.

Jack Henry & Associates Inc.

Jackson National Life Insurance Co.

Jarden Consumer Solutions

Kyocera International Inc.

L-3 WESCAM

Lancaster General Health

Leukemia and Lymphoma society

LexisNexis Risk Solutions

Liberty Mutual Insurance Group

Lockton Cos.

Louisiana Department of State Civil Service

LPL Financial

Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota

MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd.

Macy's Systems and Technology

Magellan Midstream Partners

MAQUET Medical

MARTA

Mathworks

McCain Foods Ltd.

Merck & Company Inc.

Mercy Health

Merkle Inc.

MFS Investments

Micro Motion Inc. (Emerson Process Management)

MidMichigan Health

Miraca Life Sciences

MITRE

Moen

Momentive

Moody's

Mosaic

–MRA — The Management Association Inc.

MSA

Murphy USA

National Grid

Nautilus Inc.

New Balance Athletic Shoe Inc.

Newmont USA Ltd.

Nielsen

Nike Inc.

Nova Southeastern University

NuStar Energy

ODYSSEY RE

OKI Data Americas

Olympus Corporation of the Americas

Omaha Public Power District

One Call Care Management

Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Otterbein Senior Lifestyle Choices

Owensboro Health Regional Hospital

Oxford Industries Inc.

Pacific Dental Services

Pegasystems Inc.

PeroxyChem LLC

Phoenix Children's Hospital

Piramal Enterprises Ltd.

PNM Resources Inc.

Polaris Industries Inc.

Polymer Group Inc.

PROS Inc.

Provident Bank

Public Health Ontario

QAD

QBE North America

Qualcomm Inc.

Randstad US

Razorfish

RBC

Red Bull North America Inc.

Red Hat Inc.

Red Robin

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

Republic Airways Holdings

Rexnord

RGA


Rosetta Stone

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

SAIC

Salesforce

Salt Lake City Corp.

Santee Cooper

SAP

SCL Health

Snap-on Inc.

Solar Turbines Inc.

SolarWinds

Spectra Energy

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

St. Luke's University Health Network

Staples

State Farm Insurance

–State of Colorado — Department of Personnel &

Administration

State of Hawaii

STIHL Inc.

STMicroelectronics Inc.

SunGard

Superior Energy Services

Sutter Medical Center Sacramento

Synnex Corp.

TCF National Bank

TD Ameritrade

TE Connectivity

Teacher Retirement System of Texas

Teekay Corp.

Terracon Consultants Inc.

Texas Children's

The E.W. Scripps Co.

The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics

Laboratory

The Manitowoc Co.

The Minto Group

The National Academies

The Principal Financial Group

The University of Texas Health Science Center at

San Antonio

Theravance Biopharma

Thomson Reuters

Thrivent Financial

Time Warner Cable

TransAlta

Transat

Trina Solar

Tyson Foods Inc.

UAP Inc.

Unisys

United Space Alliance

United Stationers

United Technologies Aerospace Systems

University of Pennsylvania

University of Pennsylvania Health System

U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention

USAA

Vantiv

Veolia North America

Walt Disney Parks & Resorts

Washington Metro Transit Authority

Weber Shandwick

Weill Cornell Medical College

Western Union

Westinghouse Electric Co.

Workplace & Safety Insurance Board

Wright State University

Wyle CAS

Zoetis Inc.

Zurich North America

Documents

Promotional Guidelines - WorldatWork · 2017-03-01 · Promotional Guidelines WorldatWork 6 Executive Summary While many aspects of promotional practices are largely unchanged from