Why our awards are bad

We all know that nowadays it is fashionable to talk about employee motivation and acc. do something in that direction. But, unfortunately, the majority of attempts to do something meet 3 problems:

1. The task is entrusted to those who, in principle, all the same. The main thing is to depict the activity and report.
2. The decision is entrusted to someone who would be happy to achieve results, but does not know how. In other words, "why a good programmer does not turn into a good team leader."
3. They entrust everything to the right person, he, it seems, gives birth to the right thoughts, but administrative restrictions do not allow to realize the plan.

As a result, we get something like the following set: food + LCA + bonuses (monthly, quarterly, annual)

We will understand in order ...

Intangible Motivation

Various dinners, DMSy, sports clubs, etc. - things are correct in principle. Basically, I would like to respond to the thesis of the staff: “What for, these buns, it would be better to give me cash.”

So the point here is that the increase in z.p. on 2 tr. you will forget in half a year, and from the fact that "fed for free" you will be well and warm every day. Perhaps this is already written in the textbooks on HR? ))
')

Material motivation

Now now about the awards. Consider the various options immediately indicating their shortcomings.

Any regular awards

For example, quarterly or annual.
Any hard periodicity immediately reduces the motivational effect to zero. The reason is simple - the employee expects a regular bonus, it is not a surprise for him, he does not feel positive emotions when he receives it. This bonus is already taken for granted, and this money is already planned one month before it is received.

Conclusion: the only effect that can be obtained here is a punishment in the form of depremia.

Annual bonus

In addition to all the shortcomings of regular bonuses, we also have a very long waiting period. The following problems are added:

1. It is very difficult to assess the real effectiveness of an employee over such a period.
2. The employee does not see a causal link between achievements and rewards.

The second point is simpler - no one seriously believes that the size of the award (new year) can be affected by how a person works in late winter / spring, etc.

Award based on common indicators

Usually this happens when a certain premium coefficient is assigned depending on the achievements of the entire department / company / branch.

The problem is the lack of connection between real achievements and rewards.
Roughly speaking - if we have a department of developers and sellers, then at low sales developers will mumble "these freaks cannot sell anything, we are not to blame," the sellers will be sure that "such shit is impossible to sell."

In addition, department performance is always “average hospital temperature”. If the indicator is low, then yes, most likely everyone drowned, but maybe someone did try.

What to do?

The answer, of course, is simple - to avoid all the problems described above, namely:

The award should be clearly related to the achievements of the employee, both in fact and in time.

Those. Ideally:

1. The award should be assigned by the immediate (closest) manager who should be aware of the employee’s real achievements.
2. The prize must be issued "immediately." Those. Bob got a cool feature with quality and in time - get an award at the end of the month.
3. The head can always (better do it right away) explain why so much, to whom and for what was issued. Those. there must be a sufficiently formal rating system or a manager must be competent enough to clearly indicate what good Vasya is, what was given to him, and what is Feil Petit, what to give for now

I don’t think that America has discovered everything here quite clearly and lies on the surface, but why then is it so rare that an intelligent approach to awarding is found? After all, the prize, which did not generate motivation, was a waste of money.

PS On wage growth and inflation compensation.

I believe that compensation should be. Unfortunately, we lived (and live) in conditions when inflation is high. People are just used to the fact that salary is constantly growing.

It is in the interests of the head to separate the "natural" wage growth due to inflation and an increase in the salary. by virtue of professional growth. The reasons are basically the same as described above.