Counterintuitively, paying employees significantly more than the market rate can be more profitable. It attracts A-players and changes the dynamic from a zero-sum negotiation to a collaborative effort to grow the entire business. This fosters better relationships and disproportionately larger outcomes where everyone wins.

Munger notes that many large law firms compensate senior partners equally, regardless of their individual contributions. This seemingly inefficient structure is a deliberate defense mechanism to prevent the powerful and destructive force of envy from creating disorder and tearing the firm apart.

A founder's refusal to grant equity is the primary reason service firms fail to scale and mitigate "key person risk." To attract top talent that can grow the business independently, founders must make employees actual owners. People will only act like owners if they are owners, and equity is the only way to achieve that alignment.

Startups aim for non-linear outcomes yet often default to conventional, linear compensation bands. To properly incentivize breakthrough performance, founders must reward employees who have a disproportionate impact with equally disproportionate pay, breaking from standard practices.

To ensure true alignment and 'skin in the game,' offer proven managers the opportunity to buy into the HoldCo's equity rather than giving them stock grants. People value what they pay for, creating a stronger sense of ownership and long-term commitment.

Elon Musk's ambitious, performance-tied compensation plan isn't just about Tesla. It establishes a powerful precedent for other founders, like those at late-stage unicorns, to negotiate for massive new equity grants by tying them to audacious growth targets, reshaping founder incentive structures.

A business transitions from a founder-dependent "practice" to a scalable "enterprise" only when the founder shares wealth and recognition. Failing to provide equity and public credit prevents attracting and retaining the talent needed for growth, as top performers will leave to become owners themselves.

To keep high-performers, beyond giving them equity, you must explicitly map out their trajectory. Galloway advises sitting down with employees to define their position, responsibilities, and financial standing three years into the future. This clarity on growth and demonstrated investment in their success is highly "intoxicating" for ambitious individuals.

Structuring compensation around a single, firm-wide P&L, rather than individual deal performance, eliminates internal competition. It forces a culture of true collaboration, as everyone's success is tied together. The system is maintained as a meritocracy by removing underperformers from the 'boat.'