Motivation. Do it yourself
There is such a useful task - the development of motivation systems. I watched for a long time the unfortunate HRs who created KPI systems, material and non-material motivation, tried to raise the corporate spirit. My observations always showed the same thing - HR is missing something in this work. It seems that the correct words are spoken, and the philosophy under their calculations is correct, but the systems of motivation created by them do not withstand any criticism.
For some reason, the result is always unrelated indicators, most of which are not measured. Next, a project is being launched to automate the calculation of these indicators, and by the time it is completed, the indicators become obsolete, because the business understands that it wants from people completely different from what these indicators lead to.
And if you remember that business is not always able to properly express in words what it wants from a particular position, then it becomes quite sad. And it’s okay if he cannot express it - sometimes he doesn’t understand. More precisely, they do not understand the specific representative of this business, ordering a motivation system.
')
The result is almost always “some kind of” system of motivation, which at least considers something and gives at least some idea of ​​the effectiveness of people's work. But the main problem is that the motivation system does not benefit the business, because it evaluates people according to criteria that are not profitable for it.
Such a system of motivation is also not beneficial for people, since It does not allow you to make more money, bringing benefits to the business.
As a result, I came to the conclusion that the development of motivation systems is more an engineering task than a humanitarian one (forgive me, dear and kind HR). Anyway, the motivation system is a system of indicators. Indicators are measurement, border management, consistency of goals and opportunities, a clear relationship with the business process, and the right automation. All of the above are engineering tasks.
Who in the modern Russian business is the person who, by the sum of his competencies, is the best in these areas? The programmer, who else.
During my time as a programmer and someone like a CIO, I managed or participated in the development of a dozen motivation systems - for programmers, storekeepers, designers, suppliers, managers. I participated in the development of motivation systems at different levels. First - automated calculation of indicators that someone came up with. Then he participated in the compilation of indicators, as "an IT representative who understands the complexity of their calculation." When I realized that it was not a matter of calculation, but somewhere above, I tried to make motivation for my subordinates. When she brought people a gain in money, and the company increased the productivity of people by half, they sent me, in test mode, to create a system for storekeepers. When, thanks to this system, problems with untimely loading / unloading / bundling, etc., disappeared, they began to stick me into all projects for developing motivation. In my place, of course, can be any programmer.
During this work, I made a series of observations on what principles and criteria mutually beneficial motivation systems should satisfy. I hasten to share.
First and foremost, the system should be mutually beneficial, i.e. help achieve the goals of both parties - the employee and the company. Or in a slightly different way: the system should encourage those activities that are beneficial for the business and encourage them so that they are beneficial for the employee. Well, and, accordingly, should not encourage the fact that the business is not necessary to hell, and the employee likes.
Start with the goal of the company, this is where most of the mistakes are made. It is necessary to understand as clearly as possible what you want from people performing the function (you are because you are in such work, as it were, on the business side).
What you want from them should not be much. Ideally, one indicator. If there are a lot of indicators, you will get the CSP - a balanced scorecard, which is very quickly unbalanced.
I recommend doing so. Find the one, the most important product produced by a function, and put all its important characteristics in the rules of measurement of this product.
The main thing is that the product and its characteristics should be profitable for the business. Here, alas, no one will particularly help you with the formulation of the product. You just need to talk with everyone who is involved - first of all, with domestic consumers, customers of this product. What are the real problems they have, and because of what exactly the characteristics (quality, timing, timeliness, etc.).
Suppose that two indicators are put into the motivation system of the internal programmer - generation in hours and quality assessment by users. They can be replaced by one - the development of tasks, the evaluation of the quality of the solution of which is higher, for example, 4 points. If you are also worried about meeting deadlines, add the condition "... fulfilled on time".
Solved the problem, got a grade above 4 points, met the deadline - the production was counted. I did not fulfill one of the conditions - not counted (or counted with a discount). This will be the product.
The person in this case better understands that there is a product of his work. He does not need to create two products in parallel - production and evaluation.
I had an example with such parallelization. We had a director who didn't like me. I, in general, usually did not like anyone, because he asked too many questions, rejected tasks and projects, and explained as lucidly as possible why solving a task would not bring benefits to a business. Well, I had a thought that this is exactly what the CIO should do.
So, with each change of director, all the disgruntled lined up to complain about me - the old director was already used to it, and, seeing the results of my work, he understood the reasons for discontent. I didn’t want to delve into it, and I wondered about the indicator for the quarterly award - assessment of the quality of my work by managers. It seems that there should have been at least 4.5 on average.
Two errors: quarterly assessment and a separate indicator. With that, in my system, and so there was an assessment at the level of each task, and the real haters did not hesitate to set 2. Of course, this indicator had no effect on my work. He did not bring anything useful to the business either. It was just that at the end of the quarter I came to every manager, and with a wide smile on my face I asked to evaluate my work. Of course, providing a promise to "pay more attention to your department." Received the award in full.
What is interesting is that with such an approach, unnecessary duties often disappear, or at least they become visible. This is the case when you change the motivation system of an already existing, well-established function, with a heap of accumulated inefficiency.
For example, you chose a product for a function, and people tell you - and we have been doing this thing every day, for two years already. You need to look at such things with a very close look - do you really need them?
Examples of mass. Here there are suppliers who keep a large Excel file called “deficit” in the network directory. This is a stupid list of item positions that are needed for production or sale, but they are missed. Unloaded from the system, put down the delivery time, write some comments. Spend a lot of time. All data is already in the system, in constant access. But it happened so, since the absence of automation.
We make a motivation in which there is nothing about keeping this file. Previously, there was a salary, into which the mass of such shit was placed, and it was paid “for all that”. And now - a deal with a guaranteed salary, for a sliding percentage of security. There is no room for a large deficit. No, if someone wants - let him continue to do it, only at his own expense. Somewhere in a couple of weeks, the large Excel file disappeared.
So, every duty should be subjected to the test "fuck it is needed." If not needed - fine, feel free to throw it away. If people are against - even better. You just stop paying for it.
If this is something useful related to the product - excellent, we introduce it as a characteristic.
Another option, when you can not exactly decide - to isolate this duty, and see what happens. For example, in the case of programmers, it is possible to isolate technical support for users — to put an individual on this job. It is important that the fulfillment of this duty by all in a row could not be an excuse (“we did not work out because we all helped this fool”). With isolation, there will be no influence, and you will be able to understand both the volume of this strange duty and its benefit for the business.
For example, smeared on all technical support, it seems, took a very long time. No one knew exactly how much, and who, but everyone felt that “they were ringing the whole day, as they had already pissed off, only you would sit down, you would understand it - the bell would ring again”. And when tech support was isolated, it turned out that it takes a maximum of 4 hours a day for one person. At the same time, he does not jerk any of his colleagues, he copes with everything himself.
So you have formulated a product - what do you want from a function.
Now you need to decide how much of this product you want. Basically two options:
There is no ceiling for the seller. For the supplier - usually there. For a design engineer, no. For the personnel manager - there is.
The formula of the motivation system depends on the presence of the ceiling: piece-rate or for achieving / maintaining a level.
For example, it is wrong to pay the supplier for the volume of purchase, it will overwhelm you with some kind of hardware, which is brought an hour after the order in any volume. To pay for maintaining the buffer in the green zone is correct, even if a person did not do anything for this in the reporting period, due to the lack of consumption of the buffer, he is not guilty of that.
Paying the seller for the volume of orders is also not always correct (except when the demand is much lower than the supply). It is better for the seller to pay for sales, and even better for the arrival of money, because the characteristics necessary for the business have already been incorporated into the product “sale”. For example, a sale and payment means that the product has been produced, all materials have been purchased, services have been rendered, money has arrived in the settlement account. Well, this is a clear example for everyone.
There is another option for advanced - the definition of a product through sales or profits for those who are not engaged in sales and profits.
For example, pay the supplier a percentage of the profits from the sales of what he bought. Or pay the design engineer a percentage of the sales of what he designed (such as the author's percentage).
This option is bad because the business process is not obvious - what exactly should a person do every day in order to earn more. This is an indicator that measures the contribution to the final result, not the execution of the process.
If the business process is of poor quality, then people will begin to sabotage its changes - they will be afraid that your changes will negatively affect the result and, accordingly, their income.
But this option is also good - because you involve people in creating / optimizing a business process that leads to the desired result, because the requirements for the result are the same with you now.
To use this option or not depends on the situation and the people for whom you are making a motivation system. If there are sensible, initiative, and there is a real impact of them or your business process - you can try.
So, if there is no ceiling, determine how much you pay per unit of product. This is usually a percentage of sales / profits, or a certain rate - hourly, for example. Next thing technology.
If there is a ceiling, then the formula is simpler - you pay for the percentage of reaching the ceiling. For example, for the implementation of the sales plan, or the average percentage of fullness of the buffer, or for testing all incoming tasks. The percentage is in units of the product you have defined for the function.
In the process of developing a motivation system, I highly recommend using at least the triad of changes (there will be a separate article about the triad).
Surely it turns out that the business process does not allow to produce, or select and measure the product that you called the main one. Surely the automated system that you use will not allow you to calculate indicators of motivation, especially in daily mode.
Therefore, I recommend the triad - immediately change the motivation system, the business process, and automation.
This is especially true if you launch a new motivation system in test mode, in parallel with the current one, for a certain period. I, by the way, always do that - and people will look at the alternative in terms of income, and the system can be run in, the shortcomings eliminated.
Also, the test period is important for collecting statistics, especially if you measure a product that was not measured before. You need to determine the price for it, and for this you need to understand how many units of the product a person produces per month.
The price at the same time is approximately equal to the ratio of a person’s income to the volume of the product produced Perhaps with a slight decrease, so that there is an incentive to do more.
That's all - automate, test, run, monitor and correct.
Let's look at the result from the employee. The main thing that gives the employee such a motivation system is certainty. He clearly understands what money is paid for and what is not. And how much they pay. And what you need to do to earn more.
There are, of course, workers for whom such a system would be unprofitable - those who are used to hiding in the general mass, when the personal result is not measurable. Also those who came just to sit. These are great guys, but the article is not about them and not for them.
For some reason, the result is always unrelated indicators, most of which are not measured. Next, a project is being launched to automate the calculation of these indicators, and by the time it is completed, the indicators become obsolete, because the business understands that it wants from people completely different from what these indicators lead to.
And if you remember that business is not always able to properly express in words what it wants from a particular position, then it becomes quite sad. And it’s okay if he cannot express it - sometimes he doesn’t understand. More precisely, they do not understand the specific representative of this business, ordering a motivation system.
')
The result is almost always “some kind of” system of motivation, which at least considers something and gives at least some idea of ​​the effectiveness of people's work. But the main problem is that the motivation system does not benefit the business, because it evaluates people according to criteria that are not profitable for it.
Such a system of motivation is also not beneficial for people, since It does not allow you to make more money, bringing benefits to the business.
As a result, I came to the conclusion that the development of motivation systems is more an engineering task than a humanitarian one (forgive me, dear and kind HR). Anyway, the motivation system is a system of indicators. Indicators are measurement, border management, consistency of goals and opportunities, a clear relationship with the business process, and the right automation. All of the above are engineering tasks.
Who in the modern Russian business is the person who, by the sum of his competencies, is the best in these areas? The programmer, who else.
During my time as a programmer and someone like a CIO, I managed or participated in the development of a dozen motivation systems - for programmers, storekeepers, designers, suppliers, managers. I participated in the development of motivation systems at different levels. First - automated calculation of indicators that someone came up with. Then he participated in the compilation of indicators, as "an IT representative who understands the complexity of their calculation." When I realized that it was not a matter of calculation, but somewhere above, I tried to make motivation for my subordinates. When she brought people a gain in money, and the company increased the productivity of people by half, they sent me, in test mode, to create a system for storekeepers. When, thanks to this system, problems with untimely loading / unloading / bundling, etc., disappeared, they began to stick me into all projects for developing motivation. In my place, of course, can be any programmer.
During this work, I made a series of observations on what principles and criteria mutually beneficial motivation systems should satisfy. I hasten to share.
First and foremost, the system should be mutually beneficial, i.e. help achieve the goals of both parties - the employee and the company. Or in a slightly different way: the system should encourage those activities that are beneficial for the business and encourage them so that they are beneficial for the employee. Well, and, accordingly, should not encourage the fact that the business is not necessary to hell, and the employee likes.
Start with the goal of the company, this is where most of the mistakes are made. It is necessary to understand as clearly as possible what you want from people performing the function (you are because you are in such work, as it were, on the business side).
What you want from them should not be much. Ideally, one indicator. If there are a lot of indicators, you will get the CSP - a balanced scorecard, which is very quickly unbalanced.
I recommend doing so. Find the one, the most important product produced by a function, and put all its important characteristics in the rules of measurement of this product.
The main thing is that the product and its characteristics should be profitable for the business. Here, alas, no one will particularly help you with the formulation of the product. You just need to talk with everyone who is involved - first of all, with domestic consumers, customers of this product. What are the real problems they have, and because of what exactly the characteristics (quality, timing, timeliness, etc.).
Suppose that two indicators are put into the motivation system of the internal programmer - generation in hours and quality assessment by users. They can be replaced by one - the development of tasks, the evaluation of the quality of the solution of which is higher, for example, 4 points. If you are also worried about meeting deadlines, add the condition "... fulfilled on time".
Solved the problem, got a grade above 4 points, met the deadline - the production was counted. I did not fulfill one of the conditions - not counted (or counted with a discount). This will be the product.
The person in this case better understands that there is a product of his work. He does not need to create two products in parallel - production and evaluation.
I had an example with such parallelization. We had a director who didn't like me. I, in general, usually did not like anyone, because he asked too many questions, rejected tasks and projects, and explained as lucidly as possible why solving a task would not bring benefits to a business. Well, I had a thought that this is exactly what the CIO should do.
So, with each change of director, all the disgruntled lined up to complain about me - the old director was already used to it, and, seeing the results of my work, he understood the reasons for discontent. I didn’t want to delve into it, and I wondered about the indicator for the quarterly award - assessment of the quality of my work by managers. It seems that there should have been at least 4.5 on average.
Two errors: quarterly assessment and a separate indicator. With that, in my system, and so there was an assessment at the level of each task, and the real haters did not hesitate to set 2. Of course, this indicator had no effect on my work. He did not bring anything useful to the business either. It was just that at the end of the quarter I came to every manager, and with a wide smile on my face I asked to evaluate my work. Of course, providing a promise to "pay more attention to your department." Received the award in full.
What is interesting is that with such an approach, unnecessary duties often disappear, or at least they become visible. This is the case when you change the motivation system of an already existing, well-established function, with a heap of accumulated inefficiency.
For example, you chose a product for a function, and people tell you - and we have been doing this thing every day, for two years already. You need to look at such things with a very close look - do you really need them?
Examples of mass. Here there are suppliers who keep a large Excel file called “deficit” in the network directory. This is a stupid list of item positions that are needed for production or sale, but they are missed. Unloaded from the system, put down the delivery time, write some comments. Spend a lot of time. All data is already in the system, in constant access. But it happened so, since the absence of automation.
We make a motivation in which there is nothing about keeping this file. Previously, there was a salary, into which the mass of such shit was placed, and it was paid “for all that”. And now - a deal with a guaranteed salary, for a sliding percentage of security. There is no room for a large deficit. No, if someone wants - let him continue to do it, only at his own expense. Somewhere in a couple of weeks, the large Excel file disappeared.
So, every duty should be subjected to the test "fuck it is needed." If not needed - fine, feel free to throw it away. If people are against - even better. You just stop paying for it.
If this is something useful related to the product - excellent, we introduce it as a characteristic.
Another option, when you can not exactly decide - to isolate this duty, and see what happens. For example, in the case of programmers, it is possible to isolate technical support for users — to put an individual on this job. It is important that the fulfillment of this duty by all in a row could not be an excuse (“we did not work out because we all helped this fool”). With isolation, there will be no influence, and you will be able to understand both the volume of this strange duty and its benefit for the business.
For example, smeared on all technical support, it seems, took a very long time. No one knew exactly how much, and who, but everyone felt that “they were ringing the whole day, as they had already pissed off, only you would sit down, you would understand it - the bell would ring again”. And when tech support was isolated, it turned out that it takes a maximum of 4 hours a day for one person. At the same time, he does not jerk any of his colleagues, he copes with everything himself.
So you have formulated a product - what do you want from a function.
Now you need to decide how much of this product you want. Basically two options:
- As much as possible (no ceiling)
- No more than necessary (there is a ceiling).
There is no ceiling for the seller. For the supplier - usually there. For a design engineer, no. For the personnel manager - there is.
The formula of the motivation system depends on the presence of the ceiling: piece-rate or for achieving / maintaining a level.
For example, it is wrong to pay the supplier for the volume of purchase, it will overwhelm you with some kind of hardware, which is brought an hour after the order in any volume. To pay for maintaining the buffer in the green zone is correct, even if a person did not do anything for this in the reporting period, due to the lack of consumption of the buffer, he is not guilty of that.
Paying the seller for the volume of orders is also not always correct (except when the demand is much lower than the supply). It is better for the seller to pay for sales, and even better for the arrival of money, because the characteristics necessary for the business have already been incorporated into the product “sale”. For example, a sale and payment means that the product has been produced, all materials have been purchased, services have been rendered, money has arrived in the settlement account. Well, this is a clear example for everyone.
There is another option for advanced - the definition of a product through sales or profits for those who are not engaged in sales and profits.
For example, pay the supplier a percentage of the profits from the sales of what he bought. Or pay the design engineer a percentage of the sales of what he designed (such as the author's percentage).
This option is bad because the business process is not obvious - what exactly should a person do every day in order to earn more. This is an indicator that measures the contribution to the final result, not the execution of the process.
If the business process is of poor quality, then people will begin to sabotage its changes - they will be afraid that your changes will negatively affect the result and, accordingly, their income.
But this option is also good - because you involve people in creating / optimizing a business process that leads to the desired result, because the requirements for the result are the same with you now.
To use this option or not depends on the situation and the people for whom you are making a motivation system. If there are sensible, initiative, and there is a real impact of them or your business process - you can try.
So, if there is no ceiling, determine how much you pay per unit of product. This is usually a percentage of sales / profits, or a certain rate - hourly, for example. Next thing technology.
If there is a ceiling, then the formula is simpler - you pay for the percentage of reaching the ceiling. For example, for the implementation of the sales plan, or the average percentage of fullness of the buffer, or for testing all incoming tasks. The percentage is in units of the product you have defined for the function.
In the process of developing a motivation system, I highly recommend using at least the triad of changes (there will be a separate article about the triad).
Surely it turns out that the business process does not allow to produce, or select and measure the product that you called the main one. Surely the automated system that you use will not allow you to calculate indicators of motivation, especially in daily mode.
Therefore, I recommend the triad - immediately change the motivation system, the business process, and automation.
This is especially true if you launch a new motivation system in test mode, in parallel with the current one, for a certain period. I, by the way, always do that - and people will look at the alternative in terms of income, and the system can be run in, the shortcomings eliminated.
Also, the test period is important for collecting statistics, especially if you measure a product that was not measured before. You need to determine the price for it, and for this you need to understand how many units of the product a person produces per month.
The price at the same time is approximately equal to the ratio of a person’s income to the volume of the product produced Perhaps with a slight decrease, so that there is an incentive to do more.
That's all - automate, test, run, monitor and correct.
Let's look at the result from the employee. The main thing that gives the employee such a motivation system is certainty. He clearly understands what money is paid for and what is not. And how much they pay. And what you need to do to earn more.
There are, of course, workers for whom such a system would be unprofitable - those who are used to hiding in the general mass, when the personal result is not measurable. Also those who came just to sit. These are great guys, but the article is not about them and not for them.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/454046/
All Articles