Managing commitment in the company: keys to boosting contribution

In recent years, organizational contribution has gained a strategic place on the agenda of executives.
Previously, the main focus was on financial results; then Kaplan and Norton broadened the view with their four perspectives model of the Balanced Scorecard, integrating variables of learning, processes, and customers.
Later, foresight was incorporated into planning exercises to anticipate scenarios and measure the impact of strategic decisions.

In the field of Human Management, authors such as Jack Fitz-Enz contributed a quantitative vision with the ROI of Human Talent and, more recently, with HR Analytics, strengthening the link between people, strategy, and results.

In short, today’s management language is comprehensive: it combines financial, organizational, and human indicators, all of which are essential for business sustainability.

Findings in intervention processes

Over the past two years, in six consulting processes carried out with different companies, we have identified several recurring findings:

1. Poorly defined organizational capabilities. Executive teams often struggle to specify which key capabilities differentiate their organization and make their strategy viable.
2. High specialization, low integration. Leaders master their technical fields but still need to strengthen the connection between their area’s results and the corporate strategy.
3. Outdated job descriptions. In many companies, these documents focus on functions and requirements rather than deliverables, results, or strategic responsibilities.
4. Lack of focus on process management. Descriptions rarely include aspects such as challenges, decision-making level, or relational impact—essential elements for job evaluation and role clarity.
5. Mental health management disconnected from workload analysis. To safeguard well-being, it is first necessary to understand how time is invested and what level of demand each responsibility entails.
6. Performance evaluation with room for improvement. Even when performance is measured, indicators are often misaligned with behaviors or strategic objectives.
7. Underdeveloped compensation strategies. It is common to find pay schemes without technical evaluation (internal equity), market comparison (competitiveness), or a clear employee value proposition. A great deal of effort is devoted to payroll administration, while incentive design that drives contribution is often neglected.

How to Build a Culture of Contribution

As mentioned in a previous article, contribution with purpose develops across three levels: organizational, departmental, and individual.

1. Organizational Level

More and more, executives are broadening their perspective and integrating organizational architecture variables such as:

• Strategy progress (BSC).

• Process effectiveness (Quality).

• Client satisfaction and loyalty (EnPS).

• Culture, leadership, and talent engagement.

2. Departmental or Process Level

The structural capital exercise has been a catalyst, as it clarifies what is sought, how it is done, and who participates.
During team workshops, it is often evident that not all collaborators master the characterization process of their own area—highlighting a critical improvement opportunity.

3. Individual Level

The integrated management of job descriptions, performance evaluation, and compensation is key to strengthening high-performance cultures.
When these processes are aligned, the Human Talent area ceases to be merely operational and becomes a true strategic business partner.

In Conclusion

Driving contribution with purpose is not an isolated project but an organizational practice that strengthens strategy, leadership, and well-being.

There is still room for improvement—and doing so yields visible results in commitment, productivity, and sustainability.

Let’s talk about how to build a culture in your company where contribution becomes a natural behavior and a true driver of value.