Hitki Blog

The organization and its managers have certain joint responsibilities in motivating individuals. They have to:

1. Provide for excellent supervision.
2. Give rewards to those individuals and teams that deserve them.
3. Build social relationships among the staff.
4. Treat staff fairly.

Supervision. One of the biggest factors that adds or takes away from how motivated a team member feels at work is the individual’s relationship with her immediate supervisor or manager. When surveys ask team members what motivates them the most at work, supervision is usually near the top of the list. There are many stories of team members who have had promotional opportunities or been offered higher-paying jobs in other companies but who turned down the offers because of their working relationship with, or their respect for, their immediate bosses.

The organization’s responsibility for supervision is to recruit and/or promote those individuals who want to be managers and to give them all the necessary training, guidance, and mentoring to become successful at managing. The manager’s responsibility is to become the best possible manager.

Rewards. We are talking here about things that have a monetary value associated with them. (Psychic rewards, like praise for a job well done, are equally important!) The monetary value can be small or large. Rewards are in addition to what the team member is already receiving and should be given for superior performance. Examples of rewards include bonuses, stock options, profit sharing, time off with pay (in addition to vacation time or holidays), dinners, lunches, use of a company car, company-sponsored picnics and outings, theater tickets, spot awards (receiving money on the spot for excellent performance), clothing, and watches.

The organization’s responsibility is to adequately fund rewards (sometimes called "perks," which is shorthand for perquisite but also an appropriate name because they can perk the spirit of a team member) and to guarantee that rewards are distributed fairly. The managers’ responsibility is to decide who in their unit or department meets the criteria for the reward and to see that they get the reward. The organization and its managers, working together, should decide on what the rewards should be. It is definitely a good idea to include team members in the decision about what the rewards will be.

There are a few key points to remember about rewards:

Rewards are short term. A manager cannot say, for example, "What do you mean we don’t try to motivate you? Don’t you remember that pizza party we had two years ago?" That won’t work. Rewards work for a period of time, and then team members forget about them.

Rewards have to be meaningful. Many team members don’t appreciate getting certain types of rewards because they are not meaningful to them. Not all employees like to go to the theater or dine out, or they don’t need to receive another company T-shirt. Managers and organizations need to realize that what one team member considers a reward another person may not.

One of the best ways of distributing rewards is cafeteria style, or giving staff members a choice as to the reward they want. Let’s say a particular team member becomes employee of the month. Under the cafeteria plan she gets to choose what she wants from a long list of items. Following is a sampling of items that have appeared on cafeteria award lists:

1. Pet-grooming services for your cat or dog
2. Skydiving lessons
3. Foreign language lessons
4. A family portrait
5. Morning coffee and treats every Friday for your team for six months
6. A year’s supply of M&Ms
7. A day at a spa for you and your significant other
8. A shopping spree at the supermarket
9. Flowers delivered to your desk once a month for the next four months
10. Lunch with the CEO at a restaurant of your choice
11. A donation in your name to your favorite charity
12. Limo pickup and return trip for one week
13. Sports lessons for your child
14. Two days off with pay
15. A party in your honor with the entire company invited

The Basketball Game Case

In 1999, a bank in Los Angeles gave its entire staff free basket-ball tickets with seating in the best sections of Staples Center (the sports arena). This reward backfired on the bank and its managers because the reward tickets were to a Clipper game. In 1999, the Clippers were the worst team in the history of NBA basketball. No one was going to the games except some relatives. The banking staff didn’t appreciate this reward; in fact, they became very angry and resentful when they received it. They felt as if the bank really did not care about them by rewarding them in such a way. If the bank and its managers had decided to give the staff Laker tickets, it would have been another story. Then, even if a team member didn’t especially like basketball, he could have easily given the tickets away to family members, friends, or neighbors.

Rewards have to be fairly distributed. In many organizations certain individuals, teams, or departments seem to get most of the rewards or have a much better chance of getting them based on who they are and not on their performance. Managers and organizations need to have a systematic way, based on set criteria, to determine who receives the rewards. Team members from any department or holding any job title should feel that they are eligible for a reward and have an equal chance of getting it, if they do outstanding work.

The ante has to be raised. If, for example, over the last three years all productivity stage 5 team members received a 5 percent bonus, and they get another 5 percent this year, the bonus won’t be as motivational as it once was. It may have to be raised to 6 percent or 7 percent. After a period of time, rewards tend to level off. If managers and organizations want to increase motivational levels, they will have to increase the amount of the reward, or replace it with a more desirable reward.

Once given, rewards are hard to rescind. Organizations and managers want to give staff rewards that they appreciate and promote a higher motivational level. That is the major purpose of giving rewards. If these rewards are then taken away or reduced, it will have a detrimental effect on the staff. It is almost better not to have given the rewards in the first place.

The Case of Fridays Off

Heather works for one of the country’s larger computer manufacturers. For the last three years, the company’s policy has been to give staff members every other Friday off. Several times a year this has made for some nice four-day weekends (when tied to Monday holidays). Five months ago the company changed its policy and reverted back to the five-day workweek. Heather and her colleagues were alarmed and dismayed. They couldn’t believe it. They had gotten so used to this reward that when it was taken away, a steep drop in staff motivation followed. Even new staff members who came on board after the Friday policy was changed back are going around complaining about the loss.

Giving rewards is an excellent strategy for building an environment where people will feel motivated. Keep in mind that not every reward will be motivating to all team members. Managers and the organization need to determine what rewards will work best. Asking team members for their suggestions is a wise move. Rewards also have to be fairly distributed so everyone has a chance to partake in the rewards system. When the same reward is repeatedly used, it may, over time, lose its capacity to motivate. And when we take away rewards that people like, we are jeopardizing their wanting to be motivated.

Social Relationships. Most team members like to have people to talk to. They want to share their thoughts and ideas and socialize with others on the team. Most staff members want to get to know each other on a more personal level. It makes them feel more secure and fulfills people’s need to belong. When organizations and managers provide social opportunities for team members, they are enhancing the chances that people will want to be motivated. There are many strategies that can be used to foster social relationships. Here are just a few ideas:

1. Organize sports teams that compete against other departments or organizations.
2. Make available exercise, meditation, or yoga classes.
3. Hold educational seminars and workshops.
4. Organize theme days, such as a bring-your-child-to-work day or pet day.
5. Take the team out to lunch occasionally or bring in some donuts or bagels.
6. Have places besides the cafeteria where staff members can talk comfortably.
7. Speak to staff members and ask them what type of social activities they would prefer.

Fair Treatment. Fair treatment is an intangible motivator. It cannot be seen or purchased. However, it is real. If organizations and managers treat their team members consistently with regard to policies, standards, rules, and behaviors, they will create a workplace environment of caring. When team members feel cared for, their loyalty and trust increase. When this happens, they will want to be motivated. Team members will especially be looking for fair treatment during the critical interventions. Critical interventions are those occasions when the organization and its managers officially evaluate a team member’s ability to do a job or task, or to move to the next level or performance proficiency. Seven critical interventions are particularly important to team members:

The Seven Critical Interventions

1. Hiring a new team member
2. Selecting an existing team member for a special project or assignment
3. Determining who should be afforded a special learning opportunity
4. Planning a team member’s career path
5. Scheduling formal and informal feedback sessions, including the performance appraisal
6. Selecting a team member for promotion
7. Assigning the shift, location, department, or the manager the team member reports to

It is especially at these seven times, or the critical incidents, when organizations and managers demonstrate how fair they are really being. Managers have direct contact with team members and make most of the decisions involving the critical incidents. However, the organization needs to make sure that its managers are making the right decisions and treating all team members fairly.

Case Study: Selecting a Team Member for Promotion

After six years as a branch manager, Victoria has finally been promoted to director of operations, overseeing all twelve branches. The company prefers to fill vacancies with internal candidates, and Victoria has been asked to pick one of her current employees to replace her as branch manager.

Three of her seven employees are part-timers, while two others are recent hires. That narrows her choice down to two candidates: Joshua and Marilyn. Both have good records and both have indicated that they would welcome the promotion. Victoria knows that this isn’t going to be an easy choice. To help organize her thinking, she lists the characteristics of a good branch manager and puts together some notes about both Joshua and Marilyn.

Reviewing her notes, Victoria decides that both candidates have the qualifications. They both have knowledge of the computer systems, policies, and procedures. Although Marilyn has more experience in terms of customer service, Joshua is a quick learner and beginning to excel in this area, too. He seems to have a special rapport with the customers. They both have a can-do attitude, but Joshua clearly shines in this respect. Marilyn has learned to rely on him when she needs to be away from the branch for days at a time. But Marilyn is "one of the girls," eating lunch with her colleagues and socializing with them after work. Moreover, Victoria’s husband and Marilyn’s boyfriend are also best buddies. Ultimately, Marilyn gets the promotion.

Has Joshua been treated fairly? Will he still want to be motivated? Should the organization agree that Marilyn was the best candidate?

Case Study: The Feedback Session

After reviewing the customer profiles of all of the automobile salespeople who directly report to her, Nadia noticed an alarming increase in the number of complaints at one of the showrooms. Nadia is responsible for half of the showrooms and forty-five salespeople.

Salespeople at the showrooms work hard and often deal with customers who have their own agendas and can be difficult at times. Customer complaints at each showroom normally average five to six per month. However, she noticed that at the Long Branch showroom, the average for last month was nineteen complaints. She investigated further and found out that one of the salespeople, Gywnn, had fifteen of the nineteen complaints filed against her. Gywnn has been with the company for twenty-five years and was considered one of the better sales-people, always earning above her quotas for the month and receiving very few customer complaints. She was recently transferred to the Long Branch location because of her more senior age. The Long Branch customers are mostly senior citizens.

Nadia remembered that Gywnn had just reached her sixty-fourth birthday and would be eligible for retirement in one year. Nadia reviewed comments from the complaint log. Words and phrases varied from complaint to complaint, but common themes were apparent: inaccurate information about automobile prices and discounts; poor listening (several customers said they felt as if they were talking to a machine); and arguments with existing customers about their service appointments and treatment at the time of service. Nadia knew she had to take action. She considered speaking to Gywnn, but decided it wouldn’t do any good. It takes over a year to document and terminate an employee at the company. By then, Gywnn would have retired.

Was Nadia being fair? Was she treating Gywnn differently from any other salesperson? Should she have documented and spoken to Gywnn? How will the other salespeople react to this lack of managerial action? Did she just assume that anyone who is sixty-four years old is ready to retire?