This browser is not actively supported anymore. For the best passle experience, we strongly recommend you upgrade your browser.
| 2 minutes read

What is the right approach to policy for your mobility program?

In a previous post entitled "Creating the perfect policy," we explored how the need for a relocation or assignment policy arises, and reviewed some of the challenges that companies face when developing these talent mobility policies. That post pointed out that as companies begin to build out or review their mobility policies, they are often motivated to achieve some very specific outcomes like:

  1. tightening compliance
  2. reducing costs
  3. adding flexibility
  4. maximizing return
  5. improving the employee experience

We summarized that, ultimately, the perfect policies should be designed (or re-designed) to create solutions that are relevant, cost effective and that help achieve a company’s strategic goals, while protecting both the employee and the company from compliance issues related to employment, compensation and benefits, immigration and tax.  

There are many policy types and a variety of ways to structure the delivery of the benefits in those policies like traditional tiering, a la carte selection and core-flex approaches that provide options within a framework. In the article below by Mike Deane from All Points Relocation, he helps companies grapple with the idea of whether a tiered approach is right for them, particularly those that have smaller volumes of people that they relocate.

One of his first pieces of advice is that, "One should always consider where the company is heading, when making a policy choice." As a mobility manager or team attempts to support someone relocating or going off on an assignment right now, it is recommended to consider what the company anticipates needing over the next few years when developing a policy. We suggest meeting regularly with talent management and business lines to better understand what they are hearing with regard to who the business needs and where they are looking to get and send key talent.

Mike also dives into the pros and cons of single- and multiple-tiering structures, and helps a mobility team consider the desired balance between meeting employee needs versus the overall administration of the policies and programs. Ultimately, Mike feels that, "If your population is varied and you need to proactively consider cost effectiveness of your relocation policies, then tiers are likely for you." I concur overall with Mike's conclusions. The hard part then becomes balancing the elements within each tier as you work to align spend with ROI and program goals. 

There are, however, other structures to consider whether they be lump sums, a la carte, core-flex or even the latest in mobility policy delivery that allows for an even higher level of choice, care and control to be delivered to relocating employees with less administration and fewer headaches. We call it Point C — and it’s here to change the way companies do mobility. It allows programs to control costs, offers unique benefit solutions, enables complete employee choice, reduces administration and elevates the employee experience. It's something mobility teams really need to see if any of those things are program goals.

So, are low mobility and high mobility corporations built so differently that the former has to resolve itself to a single-tier policy?  Not at all. If your population is varied and you need to proactively consider cost effectiveness of your relocation policies, then tiers are likely for you.  Just realize that it will increase administration, but there is help out there for you.


global mobility, relocation, international assignments, cost, benefits, employee experience, tiers, lump sum, policy approach, core-flex, cafeteria, point c