Last week I started a new thing where I scour the web (well, just my RSS feeds, google alerts and twitter stuff) and provide a summary of what I think is interesting in the incentive, reward and recognition space. I'm using the service called "scoop.it." (It's in beta - and I have 10 invites - hit me in the comments if you want one.)
I think (not real sure how to use the service yet...) it's supposed to be an ongoing list of articles - but I deleted all the stuff from last week and added new stuff for this week so if you didn't get to check out the articles I pointed to then - well... buy bye. They are gone.
I think I'll do a new list each week with a date attached so over the course of the year there will be 50 or so individual "compendiums" versus one huge one. I'll start dating them with next weeks issue.
I'll add some commentary on ones I think need it (just a short sentence or two.) Normally my comments will be normal type and something from the article will be in quotes and in italic font. Still playing so it may be reversed - but you'll get the idea.
Like before - if you think I'm missing a feed that I should be looking at let me know.
Incentive programs provide rewards for hitting specific goals. Typically, the incentive program will announce the requirements and as you perform and hit the specified hurdles, you earn awards – points, credits, what have you.
Your points are good for merchandise, gift cards, travel, you name it.
All good in the hood right?
Maybe not.
Maybe you could enhance performance by simply asking a question before you start the program.
"Research shows that if you want to get people to do something, you should ask them to predict if they will do it. An affirmative answer greatly increases the probability that they will follow through."
The research highlighted in this article goes on to say...
Ask customers about their intent to buy your brand or product. Even this small step (mere measurement) will have a positive effect.
Get an affirmative answer. Plenty of studies show that if a person states a positive intention, they are more likely to act on it.
If possible, get a public or tangible commitment. This may not always be possible or even appropriate, but if it happens it will further increase the probability of future action.
While this post is all about consumer behaviors – getting people to “buy” – why wouldn’t the same hold true for incentive and performance programs?
Commitment and Consistency
We’ve talked about these social psychology triggers before. People like to remain consistent with their past behaviors and commitments. Prediction is a form of commitment.
So...couldn’t you increase the chances of your audience following through on program goals if you hit them with a double whammy – asking them if they will participate and hit goals – and reward them when they do?
It’s not really a new idea...
In the days before electrons we used to send out a commitment card to the participants asking them to commit to the program and complete a wish list of items they might want to redeem for out of the award catalog. We’d also offer bonus points for completing the card.
Little did we know we were ahead of the curve.
So... Now go back to the three points highligted above...Take out the words “buy your brand or product” and replace it with “participate in the program and earn and redeem points for awards.”
This doesn't have to be only for incentive and reward programs. Any performance issue you want to focus on can take advantage of our human desire to be consistent.
Before telling an employee what to do - ask them if they think they CAN do it. Ask them if they think they WILL do it. Ask them to predict outcomes. These questions can increase the odds it will happen.
I had a conversation with a reward and recognition professional the other day. They asked me “what do you think of gamification in the recognition world?” The implied addition to that sentence was, “versus the incentive world.”
My response... “Not good for recognition. Good for incentive.”
He said – “y’know – that might make a good post.”
Aaaaaannnnnnnd here we are.
What is Gamification
You’d have to be one of the actors in the GEICO commercials to not have heard about gamification. Gamification is the new black. Gamification will cure hiccups. Gamification is the new “it” girl.
The use of gameplay mechanics for non-game applications. The term also suggests the process of using game thinking to solve problems and engage audiences.
And it is expected to be big...
A recent Gartner report from April of this year suggests as much. Analysts predict that by 2015, more than 50% of organizations will gamify their innovation processes.
“By 2014, a gamified service for consumer goods marketing and customer retention will become as important as Facebook, eBay or Amazon, and more than 70% of Global 2000 organizations will have at least one gamified application,” the Gartner report concludes.
Why Incentives And Not Recognition?
If you don’t really believe or understand the difference between incentive programs and recognition programs stop reading now. The rest of this post will just confuse you and make you mad.
Or check out some posts on this subject here, here, here, and here, then come back.
Incentives+Gamification = Good
Game mechanics – Points, Badgets, Levels, Leaderboards, and Challengaes – apply many of the influence techniques and social psychology things we talk about here on the site, consistency, commitment, scarcity, social proof. They all play a role in influencing someone’s behavior and can turbo-charge an incentive program.
Now – time to split hairs – but it’s important.
You can recognize achievements in an incentive program (that’s good) and levels and badges are those events. They are recognition of specific achievements.
But... they are not “recognition programs.” They are recognition events within an incentive. (Read that again -important concept time.)
RecognitionPrograms +Gamification = Bad
Recognition programs – ones that are driven from corporate culture and long-term business and personal values - do NOT lend themselves to overt gamification.
Here’s why...
First of all – they are already “gamified” – but in a more refined manner.
Think about it. Recognition programs provide levels of achievement. Recognition is already about assigning someone to a category whether that be “innovator” or “top sales” or “top service rep.” Recognition programs rest on some of the elements of the gamification foundation.
But... and this is a big but (I cannot lie,) to add a level of “gamification” to an already “gamified” platform is like – well, adding peanut butter to a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. It is just too much. It changes the sandwich from something good and gooey to something just gooey. Adding gamification on top of a high-level recognition program just makes it less good and more gooey.
Gamification = manipulation.
If you “gamify” a recognition program – start layering in things that take away from the core values you dilute the real intent. The real intent of a strategic recognition program is to reinforce a culture – reinforce core beliefs and tenets. Gamification, in the word itself, communicates that the system can be manipulated.
In addition, gamification is about short-term – it’s about the “next step” – not the big picture.
Strategic corporate recognition programs reward bigger issues than a simple behavior. Recognition programs – the strategic kind – not the little employee of the month parking space kind – require a more dignified approach (IMHO).
Can you use gamification in an overall recognition strategy?
Sure.
Will it communicate that you don’t take recognition seriously and you think it is a game to be played versus a business approach to be lived? Yep.
Will people be engaged? Yes.
Engaged in scamming the system to get the badges, levels, etc., not to be recognized for their connection to the mission and values of the company.
Gamification takes the focus off the outcome and places it squarely on the game. Recognition should focus squarely on the outcome and take the focus off the game.
So... if your incentive supplier wants to add gaming elements to your incentive program say “Tell me more.”
If they want to add gamification to your strategic recognition program, well, as they say in “The Holy Grail” – RUN AWAAAAAAAY....
(Video below from "The Holy Grail" - some may say NSF, but I think it's okay. Email and RSS subscribers may need to visit the post on the website here.)
I have gone on record here that the traditional players in the incentive industry really need to think about their long-term viability.
Traditional companies have seen the market get tougher and tougher as their business model get’s disintermediated squeezing margins, software vendors encroach on their space, new award options are developed by outsiders, and thought-leadership is usurped by just about everyone. All things that point to an industry resting on its laurels.
Loyal readers know I don’t recommend specific companies (our model is about program design – not fulfillment) but I’m not against highlighting companies that I think are doing good stuff. In the past, I’ve referenced, Globoforce and I Love Rewards – and now I need to add MotivAction, LLC to my list of companies to watch.
The Big Deal
MotivAction, LLC out of Minneapolis, MN recently issued a press release about a new platform for their award programs and I really like the concept. Called “The Big Deal” (might want to check with Shanter - I wouldn't want to get on the real Big Deal's bad side) – this new patent-pending technology adds a layer of game play and special access to the traditional earn and burn strategy employed by most companies.
"The Big Deal" in a nutshell...
Paraphrasing their recent press release:
Companies pick specific activity goals. Once those goals are achieved by the program participants, they “unlock” access to specific, time-sensitive deals on awards. The deals are determined by the client and are communicated via the program website, email and mobile communications.
The key here is that the “award” is not only the points that the participant would normally earn for activity in a program – but the access to deals. The participant isn’t just working to earn a “point” – he/she is now working to be one of a select few that can get behind the velvet rope and redeem their points for lower priced awards. Leveling up so to speak.
I’ve not seen the process in action but I can guess that what may be offered in the catalog for $100 in points could be offered through “The Big Deal” for say $75 in points – but only for a limited time and only if you hit specific metrics in the program.
The Real Win Here
While MotivAction seems to be selling the “deal” aspect (ie: lower point values on awards) I don't think that is the real win.
The real win is increased program performance. Here's my thinking...
1. Scarcity – By establishing a threshold for access to the deals you increase desire.
We all want something we can’t have. Another Cialdini principle in action! By making access limited – you increase focus and attention on the goal thereby increasing program performance and the influence the program has on results.
In addition, making the offer time-sensitive (short term) it increases the scarcity factor. Not only is access limited based on my performance (I got in and you didn’t neener, neener) but I have to redeem within a time frame creating an urgency that normally doesn’t exist in point award programs. And that means...
2. Redemption = Engagement.
Many companies see unused points as a positive thing especially if they are in the old model of bill on redemption – meaning they don’t pay until someone actually orders an award. However, unused points are really a big negative. When participants redeem they get to experience the award and the feelings that award brings them. No one ever got excited looking at a bank statement (well maybe Bill Gates does) – but put a 55 inch LED TV in the living room around SuperBowl time, and you got a party!
Redemption is the surest sign your people are engaged in the program. This new twist on the program should increase redemption – which in turn should increase engagement with the program.
3. Redemption = More Performance.
I’ve said this before – when you have big balance of points in your program bank account you don’t need to perform. Why? You can redeem any time. But as you spend down those points and experience the thrill of the new doodad or that trip – you want to do it again. But you’ll need to earn more points (positive feedback loop or vicious circle? You decide.) In either case – redemption begets earning. It’s a fact. The more I redeem, the more I like it, the more I need to earn to redeem again.
The Big Deal creates more reasons to redeem and therefore should increase the reasons I need to earn and ultimately – increase the results of the program.
4. Increased program communications.
Traditionally incentive programs have stayed on a standard schedule of one communication contact a month. It’s what we did when we printed everything and in many cases it’s what we did when we went electronic. This program creates additional program communication triggers. I would think they would communicate the “deals” when they are announced, when people are close to unlocking a level, when the time for redemption begins and ends. All events that require an increase in the amount of communication with the participant about the program. That is a good thing. The more I talk about the program – the more the participants are aware of it and incorporate the earning possibilities into their daily behaviors.
So... “The Big Deal” by MotivAction, LLC – nicely done folks. Nicely, done.
A somewhat new service is available in beta called "Scoop.it."
Scoop.it allows you to create a "newspaper" of sorts from things you find interesting on the web. I'm experimenting with the service and of course I thought of you, gentle reader.
I asked myself - "what would help my readers in their day-to-day life and business." And I answered - "a grouping of articles that someone else took the time to read and evaluate so that they can see what's hot and what's not in the incentive industry with little or no effort on their part."
That, is what Scoop.it facilitates. And that is what I'm offering to you. So, for the first (and possibly the last - but probably not) time I give you the...
I subscribe to over 350 different blogs, sites, what-have-yous on a variety of subjects from science and pyschology to how to build steam-punk watches. In addition, I monitor my twitter stream where I'm following 2,000+ people. I also get a lot via email. I have a lot of info coming in.
It's from all those input streams that I find ideas for posts on this blog, posts on the FistfulofTalent blog and posts for clients and friends. It's how I keep up with the industry and business in general.
And now you can have a subset of that firehouse, vetted and consolidated for your reading pleasure.
Many of the feeds I get are from incentive and reward companies. Some of their blogs have some interesting stuff you should be aware of. In fact - if you want to be sure you're at least included in the first pass shoot me a note and let me know where your site is and I'll take a look and add it to my reader list.
CAVEAT: If you have your feed set up to only show a "summary" or an excerpt so that I have to click through to the site - forget it. Don't bother sending me the site info. Feeds that only show a summary are simply padding their web page stats trading clicks for readers. I don't click through. I ignore the content ... period. No exceptions. A feed reader is for me to get info WITHOUT clicking out to your site. So don't suggest your site if it only offers a summary feed. (btw - none of your readers appeciate it either - it's a pain in the ass and it shows that the site is about you not them - they will remember that. Just sayin'.)
Hope you find it interesting and helpful. Let me know what you think in the comments. Continue or cut? Your call.
I get frustrated some times as I peruse the google alerts I’ve set up for incentives, rewards, recognition and other topics related to designing and delivering great influence programs. Mostly because I continue to see bad advice being doled out over and over again.
Specifically, I see incentive “professionals” telling potential clients that good incentive design requires that awards be tied to results. How else can you prove and ROI?, they state. While developing an ROI model is difficult when the outcomes from the incentive are not tied to specific metrics, like say, increased sales... it is not impossible.
If all you focus on is the “result” you will have bad program. #Fact.
I’ll let you read the full article here... but the points from his post that I think are critical to remember are:
"But having this single measure for performance placed so saliently in front of them, and knowing it’s just as important for their school and their students as it is for their own reputation and career, most likely motivates some teachers to look the other way when they have a chance to artificially improve those numbers."
And...
"The notion that we take something as broad as education and reduce it to a simple measurement, and then base teacher pay primarily on it, has a lot of negative consequences. And, sadly, I suspect that fudging test scores is relatively minor compared with the damage that this emphasis on tests scores has had on the educational system as a whole."
Now think about the various things in your own company that you have incentives layered upon (or you are planning to layer in an incentive ) – are they not complex?
Do the outcomes you want require people to do multiple activities and be skilled at multiple behaviors in order for those outcomes to be realized or improved?
Selecting a single measure – or a single outcome – influences people to put way too much emphasis on that outcome – the “what” – and not enough attention on the “how” and “why.”
The “what” becomes the goal - then come hell or high water your participants will achieve that outcome.
Ethics be damned.
Focusing more on behaviors means that your audience will be learning and practicing the things that will eventually lead to the outcomes you want. And those behaviors will begin to be internalized – reducing your need to run the incentive in the future.
And you’ll worry less that someone will go rogue in the organization in order to hit their “numbers.”
And... by the way... this issue is compounded when the award value is too rich for the behavior/outcome you're targeting.
As I was putting together thoughts on a post for today it struck me that I've probably put out everything I know about incentives, rewards recognition over the past 6 years. But with the way we consume information these days - in real time versus consulting a static document or book - some of the old stuff, even though it may be out of sight and out of mind - is still valid.
So - reaching into the wayback machine I found a few "cheat sheets" on program rules and when to apply different program types depending on your objectives and created a new page on the site called "Reference Documents" - you can link to it from the sidebar.
Designing programs is hard and full of unintended consequences. You can help reduce the risk of that with the rules overview download. In the document we list out the various program types (hit and win, objective based, etc.) and show you the pros and cons of each kind of program. Not all-inclusive but good enough to help you decide which kind of program structue might work for your goal/audience.
Second...
Ever ask yourself - "how can I _____?" (insert your goal in the blank space.)
If so, then check out the two documents we included where we list some broad business challenges, the audiences that can affect those challenges and some general suggestions on the type of influence/reward program that could be considered to drive those results.
More and more I’m seeing posts with headlines like: “Ditch the Carrot – Use Recognition Instead” or “Employees Don’t Want Carrots.”
I’m here to tell you it isn’t true.
Yes, employees want more recognition.
Yes, recognition is a key component in your employee engagement strategy.
Yes, recognition has been ignored in the past.
Yes, the most recent generation of employees are more attuned to recognition based on their “everyone gets a trophy” upbringing.
But don’t listen to all those recognition gurus and trophy salespeople tell you to eliminate your incentive programs.
If I told you that you should abandon email in favor of Facebook would you? They are both communications platforms. They both allow you to connect and communicate with various people over the internet. You wouldn’t do it would you?
You know they serve very distinct purposes. So too, do recognition and incentives.
It’s Not About Either/Or – It’s About How Much of Each
The purpose of recognition AND incentives is to influence behavior in your organization so that your employees achieve their individual goals and you help your company hit its organizational targets.
I would never recommend you eliminate incentives any more than I’d tell you to eliminate recognition. Anyone who tells you to is doing you a disservice.
If you’re getting the hard sell to eliminate your incentive activity in favor of a “recognition” strategy you’re being sold – not counseled. You’re being manipulated not helped.
The right thing to do is create a mix of recognition, incentive, communication and training tailored to your organizational needs.
Blindly following a company riding the crest of one best seller advocating elimination of incentives (with bad rationale I might add...) is lemming behavior and further proof that just ‘cuz everyone is doing it doesn’t make it right.
The reason for putting this little post up is that I saw an article headlined: “This year’s 10 most popular non-cash rewards” on the HRMorning site. That kind of thing always gets my attention.
The list of most popular awards was:
Subsidized training/education (29%)
Flexible work hours/telecommuting (24%)
Mentoring programs (24%)
Matching gift programs (13%)
Free or subsidized lunches or snacks (11%)
On-site perks — like childcare, dry cleaning, fitness center, cafeteria (11%)
From the headline on the HRMorning and Accountemps articles you’d think that these are the awards that employees want and are clamoring for right? Not so. Read the fine print on the survey. The list is derived from the opinions of CFOs (1,400 of them.) These are awards that are popular with CFOs – not employees.
These aren’t necessarily what your employees want – it’s what your CFO IS WILLING TO ALLOW.
Big, big difference.
It’s always good to know the difference between what is popular and what is important. Popular isn’t what is right or best. It’s simply what is currently more, what’s the word for it? Oh, popular.
Popular isn’t always effective. Popular may not ring the cash register (unless you’re an advertiser on Jersey Shore – but that’s a parallel universe problem me thinks.) Before you go an implement these award options figure out what/who your employees are and what they find interesting and important.
Don’t get me wrong. I like a lot of what’s listed above – but I’d make the case that these elements are what good companies do as a matter of course for their employees – these “awards” are (or should be) part of the basic employment contract – not really awards.
Do what is right for your employees – not what is right for 1,400 strangers with a different agenda. This advice also applies to incentive companies, reward companies, gift card companies - they too can tell you what is the most popular award (hint: it will always be something they make money on - just sayin'.)
What if you knew what the next big thing will be for your industry? What if you could almost predict where your new market will be? Wouldn’t it be great if you could figure out, before your competition, what your current customers (and a few non-customers) would be looking for 6 months, a year or 2 years from now? Yeah. That would be valuable information.
Early Warning Signals
One thing I’ve watched happen in the many different industries (including the incentive industry more than once) is that we get caught flatfooted on many changes (big and small.) We spend so much time worrying about how we’ll make money this week, this month, this quarter – we forget to pay attention to how we will make money in 5 years or 3 years or even 2 years.
But I know one way to help mediate this issue.
Recognize your vendors. Yup. Your vendors.
Outside the Wall
Employee recognition has fast become the initiative of the week. My google alerts are constantly pinging with a new blog post or article about recognizing employees to reduce turnover, increase recruiting effectiveness, cure the common cold. Employee recognition is now standard. And, if you’ve paid any attention at all here on this site you know we are firmly in the “pro recognition” camp.
But many companies still ignore a critical reference point for business success. Vendor relationships.
The Evil That Provides Insight
Vendors should be considered part of your recognition ecosystem and should be evaluated and recognized regularly.
“But, vendors aren’t real people. They are there for us to beat up for price concession and take advantage of when the bar bill comes around. Why should we spend anytime recognizing them? They’re just a necessary evil – they’re just, well, vendors.”
Vendors Are People Too – and Smart Ones
Here’s why your vendors should be part of your recognition strategy...
Many processes, products, sub-assemblies and services are being outsourced today. Companies are focusing on their “core competencies” and leaving the non-value add stuff to someone else (read “vendor”.) I’m sure you’ve got more vendors today than ever before. Your vendor performance is as critical to your success as your employees are. In fact – many vendors spend more time in you offices than your employees do. Keeping them focused on your goals and objectives is too important to leave to chance.
Vendors work with other companies. They see what you don’t. They see what many others are doing. They are an early warning system for new applications and ideas. They are working on a variety of opportunities that are probably adjacent to what you do and can provide interesting information on what is going on the space you occupy.
Vendors are people too. They will help those that help them. Treat them like crap – they probably won’t tell you a competitor is considering a new process or procedure that could shave millions off the cost of their service. Why should they? You’ve been taking advantage of them and treating them like a stray dog. They will simply let you continue to make mistakes, charge you for them and wield the specter of “out of scope” when the changes hit.
You spent time and money doing the due diligence to find the smartest, best vendors (or for those enlighten companies – partners) to help you be successful. Why spend that energy to get the best and brightest working for you and then treat them like crap? Doesn’t make sense for employees –doesn’t make sense for vendors either.
It’s the right thing to do. It’s just plain good manners my friend.
I’ve probably not spent as much time on vendor recognition and reward as I should. In fact one the largest engagements we did this year was all around how to best recognize vendors to drive future business.
Vendors Are Really Employees With W-9s Instead of W-2s
Vendors are a more important part of your business success than ever before and should be an active and important part of your recognition strategy. They will appreciate it – and when they appreciate you – they help you. Running an effective and visible vendor recognition and reward program will pay dividends for years to come.
So – next time when you meet with vendors for lunch or drinks – at least pick up the freakin’ tab.
Recent Comments