Gradual approach can be confounded by inappropria incentives... RE: [Ailist] Re: Applying leeches?

[Lionel Boxer]

Reflecting on Roger's reply to my post about "underlying incentives" ...

I was referring to a broader understanding of the term "underlying incentive"; for these sort of changes to take place it is necessary to understand everyone's fundamental principles of remuneration as well as the responsiblities in their job descriptions that determine whether or not they are doing their jobs properly.  I did not mean paying people a token reward for "jumping through a new hoop", "jumping higher", or "jumping in a new way".

People tend to attend work everyday with expectations that if they do their job as defined in their job descriptions that:
- they will be paid, 
- at their annual reviews they will be told that they have done a good job, and
- this performance will result in them retaining their jobs and being given a fair increase in remuneration over time
However, in many cases the fundamental job that they are doing and the certain way that they are doing it is not aligned with the new way that is required to behave as defined by the change.

These sort of incentives to do the opposite to the change will undermine a gradual approach, because people will not feel that their job will survive if they adopt the changes.  In cases where job descriptions are at odds with new required behaviours the job descriptions need to be redesigned to reflect and align with the changes.


Lionel Boxer CD PhD MBA BTech(IndEng) - 0411267256
Associate of RMIT University - lionel.boxer at rmit.edu.au
Graduate School of Business
What's up?: http://intergon.net/events.html
The Sustainable Way: http://intergon.net/tsw
>>> "Roger Davies" <rdavies at rtpcompany.com> 21/04/08 11:02 PM >>>
My two cents on incentive.....DON'T DO IT. 

I have found it very necessary over my last 10 year's in management to make
a distinction between incentive and reward. Incentives are doomed to failure
because they guaranteed before the act or behavior is exhibited i.e. if you
incent a group to complete a project by a certain date they may do so at the
expense of the long term viability of the project. Rewards on the other hand
are not determined before hand and are given in support of a desired
behavior i.e. one should be rewarded for identifying a critical type of
failure and proposing a solution prior to it occurring.

The only acceptable incentives are salary and overtime, everything else soon
becomes an expected part of total compensation and quickly loses the value
expected from it.

It is counterproductive to incent anyone for making a morally correct
choice. Practically this approach has stood me in good stead for over 10
years. Rewards, not incentives are what motivate. I think Herzberg's hygiene
theory adds some background to this too.

Roger

-----Original Message-----
From: ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu
[mailto:ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu] On Behalf Of Lionel Boxer
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 3:28 PM
To: 'Cheri Torres'; John Loty; 'Nancy Stetson'
Cc: ailist at lists.business.utah.edu
Subject: Gradual approach can be confounded by inappropria incentives... RE:
[Ailist] Re: Applying leeches?


For the gradual approach to work it is necessary for all the underlying
incentives to be reviewed to ensure that these only align with the direction
that the organisation hopes to gradually drift towards.  

If there is just one inappropriate incentive entrenched in the
organisation's reward system then the joyful drifting will end up taking the
organisation off the charts.  

In simple terms, many organisations pay people bonuses that reward
individual performance without considering how that performance affects the
organisational need.  So, you end up with islands of productivity in a
dysfunctional whole.

Command and control becomes necessary when people realise that they have
joyfully drifted into a devil's triangle region and they have no idea where
they are, how they got there, or how to get to the point they need to be at
(whether this is the start point or the objective).

Lionel Boxer CD PhD MBA BTech(IndEng) - 0411267256
Associate of RMIT University - lionel.boxer at rmit.edu.au Graduate School of
Business What's up?: http://intergon.net/events.html The Sustainable Way:
http://intergon.net/tsw

>>> "John Loty" <fairgo at ozemail.com.au> 18/04/2008 11:05:20 am >>>
Cherri, et al,

Wonderful development of this dialogue,

My pennyworth - 

Asking questions, exploring etc are challenging events that necessarily
leads to turbulence, doubts the unknown and the unfamiliar.

If an organisation's leadership is committed to this process and is willing
to embrace/tolerate - support a constructive journey through a period of
uncertainty (that is certain to happen!) then no worries about the outcome.

If the leadership are not prepared for the rough waters to come (where
command and control will not work - it will require "all hands on deck"
thinking collaboratively and for themselves -) then there may well be a
'change of mind' at the helm and the organisation may be the worse of!

Yes the gradual process is probably the best - if nature is any guide (trees
- especially those in the mountains - grow slowly but they live a long long
time).

The difficulty with the gradual approach is that it too can falter - dwindle
- and given our short-term thinking/ immediate results/ instant coffee
culture may well disappear - just like the Shakespearean - brief moment on
the stage..

The beauty of the AI approach (as I understand it) is that it generates a
collective enthusiasm (or collective consciousness if you like) within the
organisation that is difficult to put out! 

Thousands of years ago the ancients that wrote the I Ching observed that (my
summary) 'When people learn together they experience joy'.

Joy is one of the positive emotions that "broaden and build" our thought
/action repertoire (a la Barbara Fredrickson's research) and when people
feel good about themselves in this way they can do amazing things and the
organisation they are part of /working in/with will prosper.

Interesting thing is I just heard that leeches are being used in some
plastic surgery procedures!

John Loty
Appreciative Inquiry Advocate, Facilitator and Consultant Director Logistics
Training International 
 
"What we focus on - grows."
 
PO Box 217 Bexley South 2207
50 Glenfarne St., Bexley NSW 2207
Tel 61 2 9588 5228
Fax 61 2 9587 6999
Mobile 0411 809 404
 
focus at appreciativeinquiry.net.au 
 or
fairgo at ozemail.com.au 
 
Visit www.appreciativeinquiry.net.au 
and for our other courses 
Visit www.scilnet.com.au 
www.frontline-management.com.au 
_______________________________________________
The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles
School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list
administrator. For subscription information, go to:
http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist