Forum Moderators: buckworks
What has been your approach? How well has it worked?
It's Your Ship: Management Techniques from the Best Damn Ship in the Navy
"Thank you!"
Pay is always a motivaing factor at the end of the month. Bad pay is bad motivation.
I've been in a situation where the manager wasn't good at giving feedback or making corrections, and come bonus time, there was no documentation (either way) that the person did/did not deserve a bonus. Other managers (e.g., ME!) got caught in the middle. It got ugly, and can get really sticky if expectations aren't pretty well laid out.
I've personally been paid extra bonuses based on a business's performance (of an office of 100 people). There were a lot of dirty looks flying around whenever we didn't make the "month." And this was a medical office!
I've also seen both of these situations work out well ... it seems to depend on the manager, the employee, and the atmosphere.
There - that was probably no help at all!
I would think performance-based pay would need to be based entirely on some type of quantitative evaluation with real metrics.
Do you mean there were dirty looks going around when the office didn't meet some type of collective goal? That sounds like a good thing.
I could start emailing a link to a very short online survey to each customer after their order ships and sufficient time has passed to allow them to receive it. In the survey, they would be asked to rate on a scale of 1-5 our customer service and product fulfillment. The customer service people and fulfillment people would get a monthly bonus based on the average rating they received. I would also get some insight into how my customers feel about my business.
Much better to involve the employees in the business plans and set some mutually agreed SMART objectives, with plenty of coaching input from yourself. The job of a manager is to coach the employee with a view to realising the employee's maximum productivity potential.
It's a win-win situation because the business benefits from the increased productivity and the employees derive immense job satisfaction due to the trust you have placed in them by giving them ownership of specific business objectives, thus the business achieves maximum staff retention.
If you want to involve extra remuneration you could always give them an ad-hoc bonus in their pay packet in recognition of their efforts, but this only works if the bonus is not included as part of the initial equation.
Performance-based monetary incentives are bad because they "tell the employees that they need to improve"? Isn't getting employees to improve the whole point?
Involving employees in business plans will increase productivity because of "the trust you have placed in them"? That doesn't sound realistic to me.
I'm a believer in keeping everyone involved, paying well and making it worth a days work
"Involving employees in business plans will increase productivity because of "the trust you have placed in them"? That doesn't sound realistic to me."
It's a recognised, standard business practice. If an employee has ownership of an objective it increases his/her sense of worth.
Now, can anyone tell me how the hell to use the quote boxes on this forum?
you don't beleive they put in a full day's effort.
It's important to work hard, but it's even more important to work smart, so raw effort isn't always the issue.
Rewarding people for improved productivity will improve productivity, and usually morale too.
Has anyone taken the next step and paid any of their employees based on their performance and/or the business's performance?
I get raises based on that idea. For me, it is an excellent incentive. It does not make me feel as if I haven't been working hard enough - very much the opposite! It feels excellent to have my work acknowledged by the boss handing me a big stack of money (in the form of a check).
By telling the employees that they need to improve their output you imply that they are not working hard enough in the first place
You, as the employer, will reward them for working harder. Those who do not work harder will receive no such bonus. As it should be.
I was speaking against incentivising. There's a difference. If the amount you are paid is deemed to be an up-front condition, directly proportional to your productivity, it is very similar to piece work, which is not -IMO - the way to get the best out of your staff, neither is it good for staff retention.
Conversely if the extra remuneration is a non-conditional, after-the-fact reward in recognition of hard work, it will - as you say - gratify the staff, and improve staff retention.
If a developer has an idea he wants to try out, we will review and if it is found to be a decent idea we throw some resources and a little money at it and see what they can do with it. If they make money we do a extremely generous revenue share from that stream to the creator of the idea.
We usually ask that they give extra hours to work on it and they always are fine with that.
I will admit it has become a bit of a nightmare for the controller because we keep making up new companies and I swear she will kill me the next time we do another one. Lately we have been pulling some unsuccessful projects company names off the shelf and reusing them for new ideas but that only saves some time.
It is nice knowing that if you have an idea that it will be backed up if it has merit.
This and random cash bonuses keep our employees happy.
If the amount you are paid is deemed to be an up-front condition, directly proportional to your productivity, it is very similar to piece work, which is not -IMO - the way to get the best out of your staff, neither is it good for staff retention.
Absolutely agree with you on this. The way it works in my case: When I was hired, the boss basically said, "If you help me make this project successful, I'll reward you with raises." There was no discussion of what constitutes success or specific sales levels that I must reach in order to get a raise. Every now and then, it's just, "Hey, I like what you're doing, and you're getting a raise next week."
If I were trying to reach a specific goal (1000 hits/day, $200.00 avg sale, blah blah) then I would be much more negatively affected by minor setbacks, and I think once I reached that exact point I would slack off for awhile before aiming toward the next goal. So, since I'm not trying to reach any specific goal, I feel that my work is more consistent.
I like this topic! I've never put this much deep thought into payday before :)
