The top motivator is not money. Many studies show that in the list of what motivates people, money never comes out on top. A study published last year by German and Swiss researchers found that gifts were far more motivating to employees than cash bonuses, and that the thought and effort of bosses mattered more than the actual incentive.
In the study, cash was simply sent in an envelope to some employees. Some team members will always find ways around the rules. They will try to fix the odds in their favor. They will focus on the prize and not the work required to get it. Pay above-industry salaries. People realize that they're making more than their peers and will work hard to earn their compensation and stay on the team. When a student received five stickers he or she could take a prize from the prize box.
The first day of class was difficult for Dexter, but he got a sticker because it was the first day. The second day he did not get a sticker. The next two days he earned his stickers, but for the two days after that he continued to have difficulties. Every morning on the drive to school I spoke to him about what he needed to do to have a successful day. Because big rewards are hard to do often, I think small rewards are actually more effective.
What other options are there? Here are 6 of my fitness rewards. Remember, this is what worked to motivate me — your ideal rewards could be very different, but hopefully this list gets you thinking. Consider keeping a small supply of nonperishable candy in your gym bag. After your workout, have a piece. The Book Store. I love reading, and for a while there was a cool used book store near my gym.
If I had time after my workouts, I would go in and browse the stacks. The Stop. Like I said, I love reading. I like to carry a book with me and stop off to read at the shop for a little while on the way home.
Another reward I only get by actually going to the gym. Consider the findings of Jude T. Rich and John A. In , using interviews and proxy statements, they examined compensation programs at 90 major U.
They were unable to find any difference. Four years later, Jenkins tracked down 28 previously published studies that measured the impact of financial incentives on performance. Some were conducted in the laboratory and some in the field.
However, all of the performance measures were quantitative in nature: a good job consisted of producing more of something or doing it faster. Only five of the studies looked at the quality of performance.
And none of those five showed any benefits from incentives. Another analysis took advantage of an unusual situation that affected a group of welders at a Midwestern manufacturing company.
At the request of the union, an incentive system that had been in effect for some years was abruptly eliminated. Now, if a financial incentive supplies motivation, its absence should drive down production. And that is exactly what happened, at first. Fortunately, Harold F. Rothe, former personnel manager and corporate staff assistant at the Beloit Corporation, tracked production over a period of months, providing the sort of long-term data rarely collected in this field.
Meyer Organizational Dynamics Winter Rothe Journal of Applied Psychology December Guzzo, Richard D. Jette, and Raymond A. Katzell Personnel Psychology Summer McLean, et al. Balkin and Luis R. Rock and Lance A. Pittman, Jolee Emery, and Ann K. Deci and Richard M. Ryan New York: Plenum Press, Freedman, John A. Norton and Company, One of the largest reviews of how intervention programs affect worker productivity, a meta-analysis of some comparisons from 98 studies, was conducted in the mids by Richard A.
The raw numbers seemed to suggest a positive relationship between financial incentives and productivity, but because of the huge variations from one study to another, statistical tests indicated that there was no significant effect overall.
By contrast, training and goal-setting programs had a far greater impact on productivity than did pay-for-performance plans. Why do most executives continue to rely on incentive programs?
Rewards buy temporary compliance, so it looks like the problems are solved. Moreover, it does not occur to most of us to suspect rewards, given that our own teachers, parents, and managers probably used them.
Finally, by clinging to the belief that motivational problems are due to the particular incentive system in effect at the moment, rather than to the psychological theory behind all incentives, we can remain optimistic that a relatively minor adjustment will repair the damage. Over the long haul, however, the potential cost to any organization of trying to fine-tune reward-driven compensation systems may be considerable. The fundamental flaws of behaviorism itself doom the prospects of affecting long-term behavior change or performance improvement through the use of rewards.
Consider the following six-point framework that examines the true costs of an incentive program. Of course, money buys the things people want and need. Moreover, the less people are paid, the more concerned they are likely to be about financial matters.
Indeed, several studies over the last few decades have found that when people are asked to guess what matters to their coworkers—or, in the case of managers, to their subordinates—they assume money heads the list.
Even if people were principally concerned with their salaries, this does not prove that money is motivating. There is no firm basis for the assumption that paying people more will encourage them to do better work or even, in the long run, more work. Many managers understand that coercion and fear destroy motivation and create defiance, defensiveness, and rage. They realize that punitive management is a contradiction in terms. Punishment and rewards are two sides of the same coin.
Rewards have a punitive effect because they, like outright punishment, are manipulative. Punishment and rewards are actually two sides of the same coin. Both have a punitive effect because they are manipulative.
0コメント