LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

as they would have themselves done unto.” In other words, find out what their needs and desires are and work to meet those needs and desires.

      As this manager discovered, assuming that her staff members would be motivated by the same things that motivated her was inappropriate and could have, if gone unchecked, resulted in their alienation and frustration.

      Fallacy #4: Motivators are Universal

      Motivators are not universal. One employee may be delighted that you care enough to remember his birthday and will improve his output 200 percent, while another employee may sneer when she’s awarded the employee of the year award and may show no improvement in productivity.

      Some employees simply want to do their jobs. They work at a fair but even pace. They are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. They are not upwardly mobile.

      Some employees need to be constantly prodded. Their managers are always trying to think of creative ways to provide incentives and boost productivity.

      Some employees are easily motivated. They respond to almost any change in their environments, positive or negative.

      Some employees are powerhouses of productivity. They are self-motivators. Their environments may seem free of any motivators, yet they consistently perform at or beyond their limits.

      The point is, every employee is different. And, particularly in a business climate that is becoming increasingly diverse in terms of the age, ethnic background, beliefs, and desires of employees, it is becoming even more important to recognize that there is no such thing as a simple solution to the challenge of motivation. Each employee will respond uniquely to various motivators and incentives. The challenge to management is to identify the right motivators for each staff member — not always an easy task!

      Fallacy #5: The Burning Platform Can be a Strong Motivator

      If all else fails, light a fire under ‘em, and they’ll get going, right? Not necessarily. While employees may rise to the occasion to help a failing company get over a financial hurdle, or compete against a fierce rival, burning platforms generally only lead to short-term motivation. When your financial problems continue quarter to quarter, or the competitor remains in town, threatening your existence, year after year, employees will lose their initial fire and resolve and resort to their old ways.

      Behavioral psychologists have demonstrated for years that negative reinforcement is less effective as a means of changing behavior than positive reinforcement.

      “Let’s work hard so we can meet next quarter’s financial goals and benefit from quarterly bonuses,” will, therefore, be more motivating than, “Let’s work hard so we can meet next quarter’s financial goals and avoid pay cuts.”

      Certainly there are times when a burning platform truly exists, and you must quickly rally employees around a cause. That can be appropriate. Exercise caution, however, in resorting to this form of motivation too frequently.

      Fallacy #6: Motivation Doesn’t Matter As Long As the Job Gets Done

      The old Theory X form of management can work. Employees can be prodded, bullied, and intimidated into performing. But for how long? Generally, only until a better job comes along. And the employees who aren’t able to find better jobs are probably not the kind of employees you want on your payroll anyway.

      A strong economy has forced many business owners and managers to take a more critical look at the way they recognize and reward their staff. The organizations that have only recently discovered the importance of motivating employees learned the hard way — and often after severe staffing issues — that motivation does matter.

      Fallacy #7: In a Poor Economy, Motivation Doesn’t Matter

      If our full-employment economy suddenly shifts to an employer’s market, will motivating staff members become less important? Certainly not. Even in times when good employees were easy to find and the employment market was an employer’s market, many companies recognized the importance of motivating their staff.

      Motivation isn’t only a recruitment and retention issue. It’s a performance issue. Remember, motivation is a tool to generate high performance that will result in the accomplishment of the organization’s objectives. Regardless of how well the economy is doing, what company doesn’t want to perform at higher levels than expected?

      Fallacy #8: Nobody’s Irreplaceable

      Have you ever, after a valued employee gives his or her notice, said, “Oh well. Nobody’s irreplaceable”? In some respects you may be right. Certainly if you try long enough, pay high enough, or are willing to settle for an employee who is merely good enough, you can replace anybody. You can fill the position, but can you fill the void?

      The costs of replacing a staff member can be substantial, especially if you’re replacing employees at top levels of the organization or employees who have very specialized skills.

      A 1998 study by William M. Mercer Inc. indicated that 45 percent of the 206 medium-to-large U.S. companies polled reported that turnover cost them more than $10,000 per replaced employee. One-fifth of the respondents indicated that the cost was as high as $30,000 per employee.

      Consider that the cost of turnover doesn’t just include tangible costs of recruitment.

      Some of the actual costs you’ll have are the costs of advertising the new position, possibly the cost of a temporary employee to fill in until a new hire can be added to the staff, the cost of a recruitment agency, and perhaps the cost of travel and lodging for your candidates. But these costs do not represent the actual or only costs you’ll experience.

      Your actual costs go beyond the costs of recruitment and selection. They go beyond the costs of orientation and training. They include lost opportunity costs, and those costs can be difficult to measure.

      Turnover costs also include a number of other intangible costs. For instance, consider the following:

      • The prior investment made in the training and development provided to the employee while he or she was with your organization

      • If the employee worked in a cost center, the cost of revenue lost while the position is being filled and while the new employee is getting acquainted with the business

      • The cost of lost customers or clients who may follow the former employee to his or her new position

      • The drop in productivity for other employees as they pick up the slack for the departing employee and the new hire until he or she becomes fully functional

      • The cost of the supervisor’s or manager’s time in training and developing the new employee (an investment that could potentially be lost again if the new hire decides to leave your firm)

      Consider, also, more global costs, such as the potential damage to your company’s reputation if turnover becomes endemic and the classified ad section of the local newspaper continually carries ads for replacement positions. Think of the effect upon customer relations if customers must continually deal with new employees with whom they have not established relationships and who have not yet attained the level of expertise necessary to provide exceptional service.

      If you’ve ever lost a valued employee and struggled to find and retrain a replacement, you know that some people truly are irreplaceable!

      Fallacy #9: I Can Motivate My Employees

      Supervisors and managers certainly have a major impact on each employee’s level of motivation and resulting productivity. But it takes a team — an entire organization — to provide the environment, the opportunities, and the framework for motivation to take place.

      You cannot do it alone. You can, however, work with the other supervisors and managers in your organization,

Скачать книгу