The idea of rewards and incentives, of giving someone something as a result of them performing a desired action, is probably one of the least understood concepts. As consumers we are used to the idea of signing up for a bonus perks card or filling out an online survey or just giving our names and email addresses in exchange for some small token (or a chance at a BIG token, these days) or reward. The vendors promise that all we need to do is fill-out this little postcard or take a moment to provide this small bit of information. But what is it that is really transpiring here? The willing consumer trades his or her privacy for a $2 trinket.
Are we really that hungry for stuff or what we consider "gifts?" Yet, it is effective and marketing remains a multi-billion dollar enterprise.
One can argue that we live by trading this currency (our personal information). And, perhaps the marketing machinery has proven a lesson that organizations, as a whole, have yet to learn: people will give you their most private part of themselves if you offer them gifts. Think about it. When was the last time you, as an individual, took someone out to lunch - your treat? Did they or did they not reveal themselves to you, far beyond what you expected them to? People instinctively feel a brand of loyalty, a variation of intimacy and connectedness to you, when you "give" them something that you do not ordinarily bestow upon them.
The challenge for business and the non-profit organization is to find appropriate usage of this "carrot" incentive approach. We all know about the "carrot-and-stick" approach and the controversy that comes with its application. And by no means am I advocating for one approach over another, however, it is a proven fact that somehow those in marketing have done pretty well with using the "carrot" approach and leaving the "stick" part of things to the attorneys. In management, the challenge is to be both "Mommy and Daddy" - effectively acting as "disciplinarian" and "the easy-going one" - without appearing paternalistic or motherly, construed in a negative light. Sadly, however, how many of our workplaces would rate highly on effectively managing this delicate balancing act? Probably not too many, I would guess, based on recent job satisfaction polls.
How, in fact, do we balance reward with punishment? Thankfully, this is not the topic of my post for today (love the way I dodged that bullet, eh?). However, I can remind my fellow managers and administrators that, rewards and incentives only work when two things happen: 1. an individual or group does something desirable; 2. the individual provides you with the information. It may seem like a hair-splitting of sorts, to have as a key criterion that he or she must inform you of the action but think about it. If a person doesn't tell you, how will you know? Hearing through the grapevine is hardly appropriate without at least getting the message to the do-gooder that you want to hear it from him or her directly. Somehow, the individual needs to own the responsibility for his or her good deed, as much as he or she would be held accountable for his or her "bad" deed, if it ever came to that. Praise and reprimand come from the same source (you), so require the same - information- from the same source (the individual). This reinforces the philosophy of each worker being responsible for his or her own work and establishes a "personal" relationship/interest in their performance.
Finally, the rewards should be appropriate to and commensurate with their actions. If it is their job to do something, do not reward them for merely doing their job. Reward them in instances where they have done their job so exceptionally well that others outside of your unit or organization have make mention of it. The "reward," therefore, is not for doing their job, it is for taking it to the next level in such a way that he or she has added value to the organization by generating good PR. (After all, a "good name" is perhaps, and arguably, the most valuable PR one can generate!) As to the reward itself, don't be afraid to think "small" in size - but personalize, whenever possible, and memorialize with a certificate to add a bit of "class" to the occasion. (And, yes, even if the individual is shy, publicly acknowledge the good deed - it is essential to set a precedent that says that you value, recognize and reward "good work.")
And, I will let you in on a little secret: The "stick" portion of things can be as simply communicated by the absence of any such rewards or incentives. If your people do not do their jobs, don't reward them. When you do "reward" them and they've done nothing correctly, you send the message that they can do "wrong" and still get the same outcome as if they were to do "right!" So why bother doing what is asked when the reward will come anyway? Think about it the next time you give an extra special gift (even in the form of a "free pass" to do as they please because you are too fed up with them to do anything) to an employee in the hopes of trying to buy his or her loyalty to you - or at least, call a truce (there exists no such thing as a "truce" with a renegade employee!). Is that really the message you want to give out to your employees? Because whatever you do, SETS A PRECEDENCE...
