by Hans Bool
Motivation is often tempered by the incredibility of management (directives). Yet the incentives which management selects should do just that – motivate you to turn into a certain direction. The case is that often the reward system – at one hand – and the communicated strategy – on the other – do not always match. This is for the organization.
On a personal level you will encounter the same relation; what do you value and to what voice do you listen.
Steven Kerr has investigated this relation and written the paper called: ”On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B.” (Published in: Academy of Management Executive, 1995 Vol. 9 No. I);
...it is hardly controversial to state that most organisms seek information concerning what activities are rewarded, and then seek to do (or at least pretend to do) those things, often to the virtual exclusion of activities not rewarded. …Numerous examples exist of reward systems that are fouled up in that the types of behavior rewarded are those which the rewarder is trying to discourage, while the behavior desired is not being rewarded at all.
Kerr describes various examples of “Fouled Up Systems” In Politics, War, Medicine, Universities, Consulting, Sports, Government , and Business doesn’t escape the critics either. One such an example in the University area shows the reality of the Professor that is rewarded for (the number of) publications, but that the university values teaching qualities (more). Together these do not fit. The professor will concentrate most on the publishing task.
Additionally he provides an overview of “Common Management Reward Follies” like we hope for long-term growth and environmental responsibility but we often reward quarterly earnings. Or in the same line – we hope for teamwork, but we reward individual effort. Kerr mentions four causes
• Fascination with an "Objective" Criterion; “Many managers seek to establish simple, quantifiable standards against which to measure and reward performance.”
• Overemphasis on Highly Visible Behaviors; “Difficulties often stem from the fact that some parts of the task are highly visible while other parts are not. For example, publications are easier to demonstrate than teaching.”
• Hypocrisy; in what way do we really know whether the desired behaviour was indeed desired.
• Emphasis on Morality or Equity Rather than Efficiency
So what should a manager do about this? According to Kerr, managers ought to explore what types of behavior are currently being rewarded. Chances are excellent that these managers will be surprised by what they find that their firms are not rewarding what they assume they are. The same happens when you try to influence culture in some way where the structure of an organization is just enforcing the opposite direction.
This is not to say that all organizational behavior is determined by formal rewards and punishments...For an organization to act upon its members, the formal reward system should positively reinforce desired behavior, not constitute an obstacle to be overcome.
Credibility is always at stake; whether you are a manager or when you manage only yourself. The type of work is often the first aspect you should address. Teaching is a supportive role that is governed by quality type of rules. Research on the other hand is producing and listens to quantity-first rules. You should know what your strategic direction is. If you know that, incentives (the style) should point into the same direction. What is your incentive? The smile of a student or the money at the end of the month?
The first question in motivation is: what do I really want? Do I listen to an internal voice that values teaching (for example), or do I listen to the market (money) which values the productive work of a researcher more? Or any look-alike that better fits your situation. If motivation is really an issue, then you know what to do.
Motivation is often tempered by the incredibility of management (directives). Yet the incentives which management selects should do just that – motivate you to turn into a certain direction. The case is that often the reward system – at one hand – and the communicated strategy – on the other – do not always match. This is for the organization.
On a personal level you will encounter the same relation; what do you value and to what voice do you listen.
Steven Kerr has investigated this relation and written the paper called: ”On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B.” (Published in: Academy of Management Executive, 1995 Vol. 9 No. I);
...it is hardly controversial to state that most organisms seek information concerning what activities are rewarded, and then seek to do (or at least pretend to do) those things, often to the virtual exclusion of activities not rewarded. …Numerous examples exist of reward systems that are fouled up in that the types of behavior rewarded are those which the rewarder is trying to discourage, while the behavior desired is not being rewarded at all.
Kerr describes various examples of “Fouled Up Systems” In Politics, War, Medicine, Universities, Consulting, Sports, Government , and Business doesn’t escape the critics either. One such an example in the University area shows the reality of the Professor that is rewarded for (the number of) publications, but that the university values teaching qualities (more). Together these do not fit. The professor will concentrate most on the publishing task.
Additionally he provides an overview of “Common Management Reward Follies” like we hope for long-term growth and environmental responsibility but we often reward quarterly earnings. Or in the same line – we hope for teamwork, but we reward individual effort. Kerr mentions four causes
• Fascination with an "Objective" Criterion; “Many managers seek to establish simple, quantifiable standards against which to measure and reward performance.”
• Overemphasis on Highly Visible Behaviors; “Difficulties often stem from the fact that some parts of the task are highly visible while other parts are not. For example, publications are easier to demonstrate than teaching.”
• Hypocrisy; in what way do we really know whether the desired behaviour was indeed desired.
• Emphasis on Morality or Equity Rather than Efficiency
So what should a manager do about this? According to Kerr, managers ought to explore what types of behavior are currently being rewarded. Chances are excellent that these managers will be surprised by what they find that their firms are not rewarding what they assume they are. The same happens when you try to influence culture in some way where the structure of an organization is just enforcing the opposite direction.
This is not to say that all organizational behavior is determined by formal rewards and punishments...For an organization to act upon its members, the formal reward system should positively reinforce desired behavior, not constitute an obstacle to be overcome.
Credibility is always at stake; whether you are a manager or when you manage only yourself. The type of work is often the first aspect you should address. Teaching is a supportive role that is governed by quality type of rules. Research on the other hand is producing and listens to quantity-first rules. You should know what your strategic direction is. If you know that, incentives (the style) should point into the same direction. What is your incentive? The smile of a student or the money at the end of the month?
The first question in motivation is: what do I really want? Do I listen to an internal voice that values teaching (for example), or do I listen to the market (money) which values the productive work of a researcher more? Or any look-alike that better fits your situation. If motivation is really an issue, then you know what to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment