Search This Blog
Order the Book
Read this best selling guide to implementing strategic recognition as a sound management method that moves employee recognition from anecdotal morale-booster to data-driven business discipline. Click here to learn more.
Categories
- cash vs non-cash rewards (52)
- Comments on Articles and Research (443)
- company values and recognition (132)
- culture management (102)
- culture of appreciation (205)
- Customer Stories (28)
- employee engagement (194)
- employee retention (78)
- global recognition (66)
- Globoforce News (89)
- Globoforce podcasts (4)
- Globoforce Recognition Book (17)
- high performance culture (69)
- importance of executive buy-in (63)
- measuring recognition and engagement (57)
- mergers and acquisitions (6)
- motivating employees (175)
- operational excellence (65)
- performance management (90)
- recognition for all (108)
- recognition in an ailing economy (145)
- reward choice (56)
- strategic recognition (379)
- webinar recaps (33)
Blog Archive
-
►
2008
(143)
- February 2008 (1)
- March 2008 (15)
- April 2008 (13)
- May 2008 (13)
- June 2008 (12)
- July 2008 (15)
- August 2008 (16)
- September 2008 (14)
- October 2008 (15)
- November 2008 (12)
- December 2008 (17)
-
►
2009
(179)
- January 2009 (14)
- February 2009 (13)
- March 2009 (18)
- April 2009 (19)
- May 2009 (16)
- June 2009 (18)
- July 2009 (14)
- August 2009 (15)
- September 2009 (13)
- October 2009 (14)
- November 2009 (13)
- December 2009 (12)
-
▼
2010
(186)
- January 2010 (14)
- February 2010 (16)
- March 2010 (14)
- April 2010 (14)
- May 2010 (14)
- June 2010 (17)
- July 2010 (16)
- August 2010 (13)
- September 2010 (16)
- October 2010 (16)
- November 2010 (14)
- December 2010 (22)
-
►
2011
(86)
- January 2011 (21)
- February 2011 (20)
- March 2011 (23)
- April 2011 (21)
- May 2011 (1)
Popular Posts
-
Continuing our look at recent industry research Aberdeen Group just issued “Beyond Satisfaction: Engaging Employees to Retain Customers.” A...
-
Recognize This: If employee engagement isn’t a board-level concern, it’s not really an important initiative. Many say the follow-through ...
-
Globoforce released today the results of our research study of the importance of bridging the gap between the Finance and Human Resource fu...
-
A recent issue of Incentive magazine offered interesting insight into trends in “incentive” programs and 2010 expectations in a reader fore...
-
Recognize This! – “If managers just increased their praise and recognition of one employee once a day for 21 business days in a row, six mo...
-
A final post on recent industry research on engagement comes from BlessingWhite’s recent advice to “Align Your Hamsters & Honeymooners.”...
-
I know, this sounds counter intuitive, the companies that build recognition programs based upon catalogs of their pre-selected merchandise i...
-
And finally, our Grand Prize Winner in the Recognition Gone Wrong contest: “Here’s a great example about recognition gone wrong. I was work...
-
DHL Global Forwarding ’s Senior Director of Talent Management, Brent Biedermann, recently joined me for a webinar on how they’ve applied the...
-
Bloggers across industries and forums have been commenting on a recent Harvard Business Online article “Why Zappos Pays Employees to Quit – ...
“Paying Bonuses” * When Will We Ever Learn?
Categories:
cash vs non-cash rewards,
Comments on Articles and Research,
recognition for all,
strategic recognition
It’s nearly that time of year so many in compensation and benefits have come to dread – end of year bonuses and the resulting litany of: “How come she got the same bonus I did? Clearly I worked harder.” Or “This isn’t as much bonus as last year and I did so much more.”
Bonuses, when used appropriately, can play an important role in a Total Rewards package. The challenge with them tends to arise when bonuses become an entitlement. For example, one article (requires membership) I read this week outlined how to structure a “money pool” approach to ensure your top performers get more of bonus budget. Another article argued the benefits of “paying bonuses” to those who would be hard-to-replace and not just top performers.
What’s wrong with these scenarios? Let me count the ways:
1) You’re adding so much complexity to what should be – and can be - so simple. If you create a strategic recognition program, that allows anyone to recognize anyone else at any time for actions or behaviors you’ve pre-established as deserving of recognition, then naturally your top performers are going to receive a larger share of the “recognition” pie.
2) You’re separating the moment/action/performance deserving of recognition from the recognition itself. People need to be recognized soon after the action or behavior deserving of recognition or they will lose any connection to the moment. Think of this as the puppy approach. Annual or quarterly bonuses can then reinforce trends in performance or achievement of long-term goals as they are intended to do as incentives.
3) You’re possibly “rewarding” people who don’t deserve a reward. Especially with the idea that people should receive a bonus just because they might be “hard to replace.” If they’d be hard to replace because they’re a consistently high performer who does great work, then they will receive frequent recognition in a strategic program. If they’d just be “hard to replace” because of their degree or credentials, then giving them a bonus only encourages them to rest on their laurels.
4) You’re cutting people off from recognition for good work who may deserve it even though they’re not in the top 10 percent. Focusing so intently on top performers negates the excellent work another 70% of your workforce does that is also deserving of recognition, if not as frequently as the top performers. Adding recognition to the total rewards mix ensures a much higher percentage of employees can enjoy the appreciation they deserve.
The solution is to keep bonuses to a reasonable mix within the Total Rewards package and balanced with true after-the-fact strategic recognition. What’s the right balance? The answer depends on the company and culture, but consider reducing bonus levels by 30-40% within the ill-performing programs and reinvest that in a strategic recognition program. Our clients have proven strategic recognition tends to out-perform cash bonuses in improvements to employee attitudes and engagement by a factor of 10!
Bonuses, when used appropriately, can play an important role in a Total Rewards package. The challenge with them tends to arise when bonuses become an entitlement. For example, one article (requires membership) I read this week outlined how to structure a “money pool” approach to ensure your top performers get more of bonus budget. Another article argued the benefits of “paying bonuses” to those who would be hard-to-replace and not just top performers.
What’s wrong with these scenarios? Let me count the ways:
1) You’re adding so much complexity to what should be – and can be - so simple. If you create a strategic recognition program, that allows anyone to recognize anyone else at any time for actions or behaviors you’ve pre-established as deserving of recognition, then naturally your top performers are going to receive a larger share of the “recognition” pie.
2) You’re separating the moment/action/performance deserving of recognition from the recognition itself. People need to be recognized soon after the action or behavior deserving of recognition or they will lose any connection to the moment. Think of this as the puppy approach. Annual or quarterly bonuses can then reinforce trends in performance or achievement of long-term goals as they are intended to do as incentives.
3) You’re possibly “rewarding” people who don’t deserve a reward. Especially with the idea that people should receive a bonus just because they might be “hard to replace.” If they’d be hard to replace because they’re a consistently high performer who does great work, then they will receive frequent recognition in a strategic program. If they’d just be “hard to replace” because of their degree or credentials, then giving them a bonus only encourages them to rest on their laurels.
4) You’re cutting people off from recognition for good work who may deserve it even though they’re not in the top 10 percent. Focusing so intently on top performers negates the excellent work another 70% of your workforce does that is also deserving of recognition, if not as frequently as the top performers. Adding recognition to the total rewards mix ensures a much higher percentage of employees can enjoy the appreciation they deserve.
The solution is to keep bonuses to a reasonable mix within the Total Rewards package and balanced with true after-the-fact strategic recognition. What’s the right balance? The answer depends on the company and culture, but consider reducing bonus levels by 30-40% within the ill-performing programs and reinvest that in a strategic recognition program. Our clients have proven strategic recognition tends to out-perform cash bonuses in improvements to employee attitudes and engagement by a factor of 10!
0 comment(s):
Post a Comment | Subscribe to: Post Comments