When a technical role includes customer-linked variable pay, explain the work the person controls and the written conditions for earning it. Keep base salary, variable pay, and equity distinct. A reference to customer revenue alone does not tell a candidate how the arrangement works.
This guide is a discussion worksheet for hiring managers. It does not recommend a pay formula, provide legal or tax advice, or describe Refery's compensation arrangements. Have the authorized compensation and legal owners review actual terms before presenting them.
Establish why the incentive exists
Start with the behavior or responsibility the company wants to recognize. A customer-facing engineer may help diagnose a workflow, deliver an integration, resolve technical risk, or improve adoption. Those contributions differ from owning a commercial negotiation.
Ask whether the proposed measure reflects that work. A measure dominated by contract timing or sales decisions may leave the engineer unable to explain how their own performance affects the outcome.
Do not solve unclear role ownership by attaching variable pay to it. First agree what the engineer owns and how sales, product, and delivery responsibilities connect.
Make shared contribution explicit
| Question | What the candidate should be able to understand |
|---|---|
| Which work is eligible? | The assignments or outcomes covered by the arrangement |
| What is within my control? | The technical contribution expected from this role |
| How is shared work treated? | How credit is handled when several people contribute |
| What confirms completion? | The approved evidence and decision owner |
| What if the scope changes? | How reassignment, delays, or changed requirements are handled |
| When is an outcome credited and paid? | The timing under the actual written terms |
| How are disagreements resolved? | A named, documented clarification process |
Do not answer a missing provision with an informal assurance that the team will work it out later. Record the question and resolve it with the plan owner.
Protect technical judgment
Consider whether the incentive could encourage promises the product cannot support, rushed deployment, or preference for visible customer work over necessary maintenance. Identify how quality, security, and accurate customer communication remain part of the role.
Fictional example: An engineer recommends delaying a deployment because an integration has an unresolved reliability issue. A poorly explained incentive could make that sound like a choice between sound judgment and compensation. Before hiring, the team should clarify how approved technical decisions, changed scope, and shared delivery responsibilities are treated.
The example illustrates a design question, not a claim that a particular incentive produces a predictable result.
Walk through scenarios using approved terms
Have the plan owner prepare clearly hypothetical examples for routine completion, shared contribution, reassignment, and a customer-driven delay. Use the actual approved rules, and have any calculations checked before sharing them.
If the arrangement is new, say that it has no established history for comparable employees. Do not invent likely earnings, imply that variable pay is guaranteed, or disclose another employee's private compensation to persuade a candidate.
Keep hiring materials consistent
The job posting, recruiter brief, offer summary, and compensation documents should use the same definitions. If the scope or plan changes during the process, explain the change before the candidate decides.
Use the forward-deployed versus solutions engineer comparison to clarify the underlying work. The offer decision brief can collect unresolved questions and approval status; it should point to the governing compensation documents rather than replace them.