The other day on a post I did about “passive” and “aggressive” ways to help guide behavior within an organization a comment from @trishmcfarlane got me thinking. Here’s her comment on that post…
“Carrot, stick. Stick, carrot. My mind is reeling. How do you move a more passive (recognition) culture to a more balanced one? This is what keeps me up at night. Really.”
My first question is “Why?”
What makes you think you need a more balanced approach? Is it that you’ve read about what other companies are doing? (FOT post on zappos jumping the shark here.) Are you just worried you’re missing something? I’m not sure. But I do know this – too many folks think they need something more just because. I’m not picking on Trish – she may well have a valid reason but too often it’s because so and so is doing it. Because I don’t have one. Because, because, because.
There is only one reason to explore a change and that is – you are not getting the results you want.
And if the answer to that is “yes.” You now have to ask “Why?”
Is it communication? Is it training? Is it rewards? Is it something else?
Rarely – rarely I’ll say again – is the reason “motivation.” (Just want to put that out there for all you folks gassing up your “incentive program engines.”)
Here’s my thinking.
Choosing Between Carrots and Sticks is a False Choice
It’s not about carrot or stick. It’s not about recognition and incentive. It’s not about choosing which one to use. It’s about three things working together to create the environment you want at your company.
And here me now – remember this later…. EACH COMPANY WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT BLEND OF ALL THREE.
The Three Things
- Punishment
- Recognition
- Incentives
That’s it. Three things working together to help you get to where you want to be. Most companies do a lousy job at punishment, they do an okay job at recognition, and they do way too much incentive.
Punishment is the starting point…
I’m sure I’ll get mail on this one. There are things that are “violations” of your company culture. These are not “incentive” targets. These are punishment targets. Punishment is required in order to have the benefits of recognition. Recognition means nothing if there is no negative “anti-matter” to your recognition “matter.”I look at it this way. If your child lies, steals, cheats, or is mean – you don’t run an incentive to change the behavior. You don’t simply not recognize the behavior (ie: ignore) – you punish. You communicate in no uncertain terms that you will not accept that behavior. In other words, “our family doesn’t do that.” Same-o with your company. There are things that are simply outside the cultural norms of the organization. Those are punishable offenses. Punish them. Don’t ignore them, don’t provide incentives to change. Punish them. No parent gives his or her kids candy for not lying. They assume truthfulness as a core tenet of the family. It is expected. Same with your organization.
Recognition Cements it…
The other end of the spectrum on cultural norms is recognition. Recognize when people do the right things. You do praise your child when they tell the truth. You do praise your child for returning the wallet they found with the winning $10 million lottery ticket in it (after you cursed them I’m sure.) That is how you reinforce the positive side of the cultural norm continuum.
Incentives are for adopting or changing behaviors– they are for breaking inertia…
Provide incentives for those behaviors that are transient. You do provide sticker charts when you’re toilet training your kids. But you don’t do that when they are 13. The need for an incentive has passed because the behavior is now part of the routine. Same at work. Continuing to provide incentives for behaviors you believe are part of the core isn’t smart. That only communicates the fact that you’ll continue to pay for minimum performance forever. That creates mercenaries not engaged employees.
Every company adopts new products, procedures, processes, etc. – that is when you need incentives to drive adoption or change. But once that change has occurred – it is now part of the core right? So now you should move to recognition and punishment. Don’t provide incentives for the same behaviors forever. (Compensation is a different gig and way to complicated for this post… but trust me – different things are at play in that hot mess.)
I realize these are broad generalizations but they help determine where to focus your energy.
Check Your Dials…
Do you have a toxic work culture? Is it an issue of too little punishment? Do violations get swept under the rug?
Do you have a “namby-pamby” culture where even the smallest effort is “recognized” – (I’d like to recognize Jimmy for helping me carry my briefcase to the car last night.)
Do you have a mercenary culture where every behavior has to have an incentive attached to it? My favorite for the record: incentive is for being to work on time – hourly or specific job functions of course – there is some latitude here. Isn’t that an expected behavior?
The key is to look deeply at the environment in which your employees exist. From that you can determine which of the three dials to turn – punishment, recognition, or incentive.
I know that sounds simple. It kinda is – except the determining, designing and executing part. That’s tough.
So my answer to Trish’s question…Why do you want to move it to a more “balanced” one? Have you looked at your three dials? Which one needs to be turned and why? Call me.
Simple as pie.
(as a reward - click the image for a hilarious discussion of dials that go to 11 by my buddies at Spinal Tap - email/rss viewers may need to click through here....)
Paul --- All kidding aside (from the last post), I think there's some profundity in this post: especially the part about punishment.
One of the things we've lost in our 'T-Ball Culture' ("Everybody gets a trophy, and we don't keep score!"), is the sense that some things are NOT acceptable, and WON'T be tolerated. While I definitely think the higher tolerance that came with the social earthquakes of the '60s and early '70s was -- on balance -- positive, some of the things that were lost were the ability (or willingness) to make finer distinctions and the desire to do something about them.
And business (as it reflects the larger culture) certainly was not exempt. So, great post, and keep fighting the good fight!
Posted by: Scott Crandall | December 10, 2010 at 11:36 AM