93% of UK bosses in the banking and finance sector think it’s important to be liked, while 90% of their staff are crying out for their day-to-day experience of work to be improved, research by People First has found.

Exploring the attitudes of 250 bosses and 250 employees in UK firms, the research revealed how employers lack an accurate picture of how staff feel and the way it affects their work.

84% of bosses responding think their staff are happy and 76% believe most of their employees are fully engaged in what they do. But only 64% of staff find work makes them happy and just 42% are fully engaged or absorbed in what they do to earn a living.

“Likeability is good in a boss,” said Mark Williams, Senior Vice President Product, People First. “But with so many employees in the banking and finance sector wanting their experience at work improved, you have to ask if bosses really understand their workforces. There’s obviously a happiness gap where managers believe morale is better than it really is. They are clearly failing to measure staff engagement regularly.”

The research found men are more likely to say their work really engages them (48%) than women (37%), reflecting the longstanding difference in support and career development offered to women, as well as the well-publicised gender pay-gap.

And lack of understanding plays a role in another difference between bosses and workers. Whereas 39% of employers believe most staff quit a job for emotional reasons, only 17% of employees say that’s the main cause of them handing in their notice.

From the research we can also see that more than half of UK banking and finance employees (56%) regard being rewarded for excellent work as important, while 51% want more opportunities for flexible working.

“Poor productivity is a British disease which we can cure through better understanding of what motivates employees and gets them into the flow where time flies and work is more enjoyable and fulfilling,” added Mark. “That’s why it’s important to rely on more than gut feeling about how happy or engaged staff are. Regular check-ins must replace the dated annual appraisal as only with regular conversations can an employer see the true picture of their employees.”

“There are so many different aspects to any banking and finance job, such as training, career development and flexible working, that making assumptions about what employees want is misguided. As an employer you need to know what makes your staff happy to work hard and what makes them leave.”

It’s a discussion that has been ongoing since business was a thing. Why should the boss be paid more than his/her employees? Here Chris Abbass, co-founder of Talentful, delves deep into the considerations to make when posing this question.

As the founder of a fast-growing business, I can attest to the levels of stress, sacrifice and sleepless nights executives go through to build and run their companies. At an executive level, you are expected to be available 24hrs a day and have a huge amount of responsibility for the successes, but also any failures your business may go through. Further, individuals who set up businesses take on an immense amount of risk – they have much less security, and put themselves at risk of potential failure if the business does not go to plan, which can greatly damage their reputation.

When it comes to CEOs and those at C level positions, though they did not start the business, they have the success of it resting on their shoulders. We have seen many individuals at executive level get fired for things that have gone wrong without the bat of an eyelash. Executives are in positions with the highest risk and are held accountable for anything that goes wrong or right in the organisation. Because of this, I believe that their pay should be reflective of their successes and failures.

Pay, at the executive level, should always be in line with how well the business is doing, how successful they are, and how much value the individual is bringing the business. If the business is performing well this should be reflected in executive pay. Conversely, if an organisation’s performance is very bumpy and inconsistent, then CEOs should not be taking home huge pay checks and bonuses.

An example of when executive pay has gone tremendously wrong was during the economic crisis when big bankers were taking home massive bonuses while firms were failing and people were losing their jobs and homes. As a business founder, I believe this is unacceptable and suggests individuals taking advantage of their position and thus their pay. This should never happen, but on the other hand, if banks and institutions are doing very well and are creating a lot of money for the economy, then executives undoubtedly deserve their large pay checks and bonuses. Overall, executive pay should reflect on how well the individual is doing. If you are making losses for the business and are putting your employees out of jobs, you should not be taking home a massive salary.

Executive pay should be an accurate reflection of the amount of work and pressure the individual takes on and should be proportionate to the size and profitability of the business. If a company is losing money, then this should be reflected in executive pay, and conversely, if the company is over-performing those at the top should reap the rewards.