In this post we will look at the main tools and approaches to working with team motivation and improving the microclimate, to form a stable and motivated team and achieve long-term goals.
Without this, your short-term tools will not reveal their potential and will be less effective in the long run: you will constantly train new people, and then you will start doing all the “dirty” work yourself and go into operational routine.
The exception is "conscious" companies like McDonald's. There is a clear organization and distribution of labor, something like a Kalashnikov assault rifle - everything is simple, disciplined and there is no room for long and complex training.
Content
Working with motivation is one of the most important tasks of every leader. However, people often confuse stimulation and motivation. So let's break down these 2 key terms.
Stimulation is an external influence on people in order to achieve the desired behavior through influencing unmet needs and internal beliefs, that is, triggering motivation.
Motivation is an internal process that, under the influence of external stimulation or internal factors (unsatisfied needs, beliefs and motives), encourages people to engage in a particular activity.
To simplify a little, incentives can be financial and non-financial, positive and negative.
For proper stimulation, it is necessary to understand the basic principles of how motivation works in a person (both based on his position and level, and personal beliefs).
At the same time, in life, either one of the points below, or a combination of them, is almost always observed:
work with motivation is absent or exists only on paper;
complex bonus schemes with a bunch of KPIs are used ;
it all comes down to motivational speeches, but in reality it is authoritarian and directive management, micromanagement;
cult of hypermotivation;
the emphasis is shifted to the area of financial stimulation;
bias towards the area of positive or negative stimulation;
lack of clear company goals and work rules;
having favorites;
abstract problem statement;
an attempt to create an ideal system of rules.
This ultimately leads to:
staff who are focused purely on personal goals and the desire to leave on time so that they are not bothered;
the formation of a passive culture that is resistant to change;
high staff turnover;
disruption of communication channels and lack of ideas and potential for growth;
everything lies solely on the shoulders of the owner or TOP manager.
To avoid such situations, every manager in the company must understand how people’s motivation works and apply this knowledge in linear work, project implementation, and implementation of IT systems.
We also attach below the presentation and video recording of our webinar on change management and working with motivation
Each person has 2 basic motivation programs:
avoidance motivation (afraid of carrots from behind):
motivation for success (strives for the carrot in front).
It is believed that a person has both programs. But one of them is dominant. And approximately 60% of people have a dominant program for avoidance, and 30% for success.
People who are motivated to succeed usually set goals, the achievement of which can be interpreted as success. That is, when they get involved in a job or project, they expect to succeed, receive approval for their actions and achieving their goals. In addition, they are characterized by the complete mobilization of all their resources and focus on achieving their goals.
The goal of people with an avoidance program is not to achieve success, but to avoid failure. Such a person shows self-doubt, does not believe in the possibility of success, and is afraid of criticism. Negative emotions are associated with work that has a high chance of failure. As a result, he often finds himself in the role of a performer with no prospects of growing higher, even if he is smart and has a wide range of strengths and abilities.
Also, when the motivation to achieve success is dominant, a person prefers tasks of average or slightly increased difficulty, and when the motivation to avoid failure is dominant, a person prefers tasks that are the easiest and most difficult.
At the same time, people who are motivated to succeed tend to return to solving a problem in which they failed, while those initially motivated to fail tend to avoid it and want to never return to it. It also turned out that people who are initially determined to succeed usually achieve better results after failure.
As a result, an ambitious and distant goal is more stimulating for a person who is motivated to succeed. And when working, one should take into account the personality program, which is of value to him.
The first and most important tool is Vroom's simple and extremely effective theory of expectations.
In short, employee motivation depends on:
1. Understanding what effort needs to be put in to achieve results
2. What will be the reward for this result?
3. This reward has value.
If one of these three components is zero, then the overall level of motivation will also be zero.
At best, an employee will sit on “hygienic” factors (more on this below) and do the bare minimum so as not to be fired.
The bottleneck here is the manager. His understanding of what kind of reward will be of value to the employee?
Unfortunately or fortunately, here everything is not always decided by money - for some, a sense of belonging to a common cause and recognition of their merits is important, for some, career growth, for some, power or satisfaction of the thirst for new knowledge.
An extremely simple demonstration of how this theory works is piecework wages.
Nothing better has yet been invented in industrial production. At the same time, as soon as you try to play with stories with salaries and incomprehensible bonus systems, while increasing the load on the staff, you immediately experience turnover and are forced to replace the entire staff. For whom working more for the same money will already be the norm.
Well, okay, not always the whole staff. But before that, you need to create a team, communicate with people and give them non-material rewards that will be valuable to people. What are the values of “hard workers”?
We will cover this topic in more detail below and give clear recommendations. But some of you already have questions and want examples. Here are some based on our experience:
It is important for them that their ideas are heard and brought into production
He brought ideas, working conditions became better, work became easier, and he also received a bonus. Kaizen from lean manufacturing in its purest form.
Recognition of the value of their work by top management: owner, general director, department head
Workers are energized when a “high” manager comes to their production site, greets everyone, communicates with them, listens to them. One such visit can be enough to give you a “charge” of energy for 2 weeks, but such managers are remembered for years. As soon as I started bringing the owner to the workshop, people’s eyes began to “light up.” They began to feel their importance.
Understanding their contribution to company-wide performance
That is, demonstration and visualization of how their work improves the entire company. This is done through meetings, demonstrations of indicators, communication with top executives in production and diagrams of how their performance indicators relate to company goals.
Realization of your energy and responsibility
For some workers, it is important to understand that with their honest work they can get a promotion - become a foreman, a foreman and receive praise in front of everyone. Army principle. That is, they clearly understand that they take on obligations, become “excellent” in production, and for this they are set as an example, given the opportunity to study, develop new areas, grow horizontally, providing themselves with a reliable future
Having a clear plan, when you don’t have to think and figure it out, a clear understanding of what needs to be done ( SMART tasks + provision of resources), the opportunity to work efficiently and go home early.
Let's give an example. Working on a holiday. In the morning, people were clearly outlined what, in what sequence and in what quantity needed to be done, what was the plan for the day. Where and what resources are located. They also indicated that if they complete the entire plan and +10% on top, they can leave upon completion of the work, but they must call the production manager in advance. As a result, an hour before the end of the working day, the responsible employee called, we arrived, checked and released everyone.
And this approach worked on several projects. When trusting relationships were built with the workers, we came to the point where we set a task in the morning, and at the end of the day we checked everything. People didn't let us down.
Honest communication, openness, ability to “responsible” for one’s words to a manager
So they see you as “their” and reliable person. They begin to understand that they can convey an idea or problem to you, and you will answer honestly, and not change the rules and make “empty” promises.
Fairness of punishment. This is almost the main question for workers. Punishment will be discussed below .
But again, you need to work with your people, hear them, and then you will understand them.
As an example of how we started working with the team, here is our case. One of the projects showed a depressing picture. Turnover over the year approached 90%; people wanted nothing more than to work a shift and get a full salary.
And in order to understand them, we conducted a mini-project: an anonymous survey and a heart-to-heart “conversation” with a nice 20-year-old girl. But before that, of course, we won their trust by putting out the “fire” and streamlining production, eliminating chaos in the work.
Based on the results of the project, we understood who to assign what tasks, what to focus on, and people felt that their work was valued, they were ready to listen to them, and there would be positive changes ahead. The result is that after 3 months no one wanted to leave for another unit. They said a clear no, even under pain of dismissal. There were practically no delays, and the guys came up with surprisingly simple but effective ideas. People themselves were ready to stay and work on weekends and holidays. When we completed the project, the head of the HR department asked a simple question: “What did you do with the people? How?”
Below are the results of an anonymous survey and communication with the girl. These results became the basis for developing policies for each employee.
More details and clear advice at the very end.
Our second “basic” tool is also a simple and mandatory theory of Herzberg’s two factors.
It belongs to the group of theories based on needs. As do the theories of Maslow and McClelland .
In short, there are 2 types of factors:
1. Hygiene factors
Factors that are related to the environment in which work is performed, satisfy basic needs (the lower level of Maslow's pyramid) and encourage people not to leave allow them to be satisfied.
2. Motivators
They are related to the nature and essence of the work itself, recognition (the upper levels of Maslow). They force people to do more and better, to develop.
What follows from this?
A) A person may be motivated to develop, but not satisfied. And this is where “turnover” often occurs.
B) A person may be satisfied and does not want to leave, but he does not have the motivation for more.
Conclusion:
To form a stable and motivated team, you need a combination of a good salary and microclimate, as well as job content, recognition of merit and the opportunity for growth.
This theory is also confirmed by many studies and the personal experience of many managers. One increase in salary practically does not increase productivity in the medium and long term.
In addition, we want to emphasize that this theory does not contradict either expectancy theory , equity theory , or the Porter-Lawler model. All these theories form an interconnected system. About them below.
The combination of 2 “basic” theories helps to quickly understand and realize how to solve existing problems (reduce turnover or increase motivation) and what conditions must be met.
The pyramid of needs is a simplified presentation of the ideas of the American psychologist Abraham Maslow.
He breaks down needs into levels and says that we need to go gradually, without satisfying the lower ones; the upper levels do not work.
However, none of the scientist’s publications contains any schematic images, because he was of the opinion that this order is dynamic in nature and can change depending on the personality characteristics of each individual person.
Considers 3 groups of needs:
in involvement (to be involved in a common cause and work in a team)
in power (the desire to influence and control people)
in success (high personal responsibility and desire to find solutions in specific situations, expecting encouragement for this)
It allows you to better understand what approximate remuneration is most valuable to an employee.
She elaborates a bit on Vroom's expectancy theory . Namely, he adds a feeling of “fairness” of his reward when compared with a colleague. It also explains what will happen if the “principle of justice” is violated.
Essentially this is a summary of all the theories above. But realizing it, and most importantly, keeping the structure in your head is the most difficult thing. Therefore, we recommend using a set of simpler instruments.
All these theories do not contradict each other, but complement each other. They form a single system and work in practice. Verified.
This is a very simple and understandable law, which some of you know about at the level of intuition. Its essence is that the best results are achieved with an optimal level of motivation.
There is also a second part - the higher the complexity of the task being performed, the lower the optimal level of motivation, and vice versa - the lower the complexity, the stronger the optimal motivation.
You and I are accustomed to the fact that companies always expect us to be full of enthusiasm, we are prepared for this in textbooks and business books, this indicator is assessed at leadership competitions...
However, back in 1908, research revealed that excessive interest turns into stress, anxiety and overexertion. And this ultimately interferes with concentration, effective work and accelerates professional burnout.
Therefore, motivation management, like any tool, needs skillful and conscious use.
Below is an excerpt from an article on 4brain :
People were asked to complete a task for a certain material reward. As the amount grew, the interest of the participants also increased, and they coped with the task better. But up to a certain point.
When the reward amount became large enough, people began to get nervous and worried, which prevented them from coping with the task. This experience confirmed the validity of the Yerkes-Dodson law.
It was experimentally determined that for simple tasks the optimal motivation is 7-8 points on a ten-point scale, for tasks of average complexity - about five points, for difficult tasks - 2-3 points.
In view of the above, pay attention to what level of motivation you need to achieve.
For example, if you are a boss and entrust some difficult task to your subordinate, then “motivating” him by dismissing him or depriving him of a bonus in case of failure will not be the best solution. Such motivation will only hinder the completion of a difficult task.
And don't forget to watch how you motivate yourself. Perhaps somewhere you lack motivation, or perhaps somewhere there is too much of it. Strive to achieve the optimum to achieve the best results!
Now let's look at the question: what is more important - hard skills or soft skills. And what is this anyway?
hard skills - your professional skills: proficiency in one or another software, tool, standard, etc.
They can be shown here and now, and measured if necessary. This is a consequence of functional experience in the past.
soft skills are personal skills that are difficult to measure quantitatively. The way a person communicates and behaves in society, how he works with information and studies, organizes his time, etc.
This is your potential for the future.
Below is our opinion, based on experience and observations, and also confirmed by Peter Drucker, Adizes and real people from Evgeny Bazhov’s book about coaching.
If you want to form a stable and motivated team, then you need to move away from a functional view of the employee, what he did before, what he can do now. It should be an addition, but not a base.
You need to buy the future, not the past, and look at the employee’s abilities, his strengths and weaknesses, how he can be applied to the tasks of your department and how well this suits him. How will he fit into the team?
Firstly, modern realities are very changeable, people change professions about 8 times in their lives, and organizations also change and transform. Will this employee be able to embrace change, learn, or be a source of resistance?
Secondly, it is not a fact that what a person did before motivates him. Here we run the risk of getting a competent specialist who is already tired and will simply serve the number or will quickly burn out and leave.
Third. If a person is a competent specialist, but very toxic, then you will automatically get a lot of problems in the team, resistance from colleagues even on operational tasks and staff turnover. This point is very relevant for the position of a leader.
Well, fourthly. Having strong soft skills, an employee quickly acquires the necessary hard skills.
To quickly understand a subordinate, and colleagues at or above your level, we recommend the Adizes PAEI theory. This is a simple tool that works very well in life and shows where a person’s focus is, where the strengths are and where the weaknesses are.
Now we will share with you how to quickly understand what an employee’s strengths and weaknesses are, what to expect from him, whether he is suitable for the job, how to work with his motivation, and what will be valuable to him. This is the PAEI theory of Isaac Adizes.
Its essence is that for successful organization and management (at work or at home), 4 functions must be performed:
P - production of results for which the organization exists. Responsible for "What to do?"
A - Administration that ensures performance. Responsible for "How to do?"
E - entrepreneurship, through which change management occurs. Responsible for “When and why to do it?”
I - integration, unification to ensure viability in the long term. Responsible for "Who should do it?"
“If a company is losing market share, it is likely that it is not meeting customer needs well, that is, there is not enough P . A rate of return that is too low indicates a deficiency of A. The company does not release new products or is late in introducing the product to the market - clearly not enough E. If a company experiences a management crisis when its founder retires, you need to add I. ”
Roles P and A are short-term, E and I are long-term.
These roles require different psychological qualities. Turning to the PAEI model, these qualities are sometimes mutually exclusive. So, for example, finance requires a strong A-function (correct operation), classical IT requires a P-function (systems must work, and work sustainably), and the search for new opportunities requires an E-function (one must think into the future and globally). It is very difficult to make friends with them.
PAEI function conflict
The ability to perform one function will likely reduce the ability to perform the other. This is explained very simply: the four functions cannot be considered mutually exclusive, but they are incompatible in the short term.
Conflict between (P) and (E)
Production (P) and entrepreneurship (E) conflict because (P) requires quick returns, while (E) seeks to provide them in the long term. The reverse is also true: (E) threatens (P). Entrepreneurship involves change, and this jeopardizes the fulfillment of the (P) function. There comes a time when you need to stop making plans in order to start implementing them.
Incompatibility (P) and (A)
(P)/(A)-incompatibility is a struggle between form (effectiveness) and function (effectiveness). If you want to achieve high performance (P), then you can hardly count on efficiency. This is why young companies that constantly “put out fires” and face unforeseen problems are disorganized and ineffective. They are forced to put up with the fact that organization and order have to be postponed until later. The opposite is also true: while being highly efficient, you will eventually lose in effectiveness. In other words, by overdoing (A), you will reduce (P). This is exactly what happens in bureaucratic systems, where every detail is planned and every change is strictly controlled.
Incompatibility (A) and (I)
(A) is detrimental to (I) because it forces the organization to rely on mechanical rules and procedures. Such an organization will be less focused on internal and cultural values. Making laws is easier than forming value guidelines. It only takes a few months to create a law. It takes a lifetime to form a new moral code. Moreover, sometimes (A)-rules can contradict (I)-values. The more attention you pay to (A), the weaker (I) becomes. And vice versa: the stronger (I), the less your need for (A). However, this is a positive incompatibility. If (I) inhibits the development of (A), this is desirable.
(P) threatens (I), (I) threatens (P)
(P) displaces (I). When there is an urgent need to produce results, that is, to ensure the fulfillment of the (R)-function, it is quite forgivable to become a dictator for a while, without paying special attention to integration and the needs of individual stakeholders. It is also true that (I) undermines (P). People who are united by (I) relentlessly adhere to the criteria of their own value system, which damages their ability to (P). Even if it is a matter of life and death, they will never break the rules.
Fight between (E) and (I)
(E) thirsts for change, strives to create and make changes, while (I) seeks harmony, agreement and integration. What (I) seeks to unite or keep together, (E) seeks to dismantle into parts. Excess (I) and deficiency (E) prevent you from adapting to what is happening and speeding up.
Conflict between (E) and (A)
Entrepreneurs (E) are radical, administrators (A) are conservative. Administrators strive to tighten controls to maximize efficiency and try to achieve this by minimizing variation. Entrepreneurs live to create the disruption and change that is necessary to achieve long-term performance. Thus, (E) poses a threat to (A) because too much change interferes with systematization, routine, and order. Of course, the opposite is also true: (A) is dangerous for (E). Procedures, rules and regimented behavior hinder change.
It is impossible to combine them all in one personality. What is important is teamwork, their combination in the team and compliance with the employee’s functionality.
If a function is indicated by a capital letter, it is dominant; if it is a small letter, it is present; if it is a dash...
A normal leader necessarily has no dashes, and 1 is dominant, a good leader has no dashes and 2 are dominant, an exceptional leader has 3, and 4 are dominant for book characters who do not exist.
This model also applies to the life cycle of an organization. That is, you need the right qualities both in individual people and in the entire organization.
In our practice, this theory always works, regardless of the company and industry. The correlation is almost 100%.
If you are interested in this tool, we recommend reading:
This is a somewhat simplified version of Adizes' PAEI theory. In it, all people have 2 meta-programs of motivation and 2 loci of attention
2 meta-programs
Avoidance motivation
Characteristic of 60% of people. Such people avoid failures and negativity and tend to set small goals that can be quickly achieved. The main value for them is stability. As a result, they do not like risk and change, which may entail changes for the worse, and they also tend to avoid problems, difficulties and failures
Achievement motivation
Characteristic of 30% of people. These people are success-oriented; they are leaders by nature. They are interested in what they can achieve, what they can buy. Such a person is more interested in moving up the career ladder than in avoiding the wrath of his superiors and the hostility of his colleagues.
2 loci of attention
Internal locus of control
These people are guided by their internal principles. They do not accept criticism, advice, attempts to manage them or make decisions for them. They are selfish and do not like to work in a team; they do not take into account the feelings and needs of other people. They set their own goals and are not influenced by others. Independent and self-sufficient, difficult to manage.
External locus of control
When making decisions, they are guided by the experience of an authoritative person or generally accepted norms. They actively adopt other people's experiences and learn throughout their lives. Need guidance and approval for their work. They are sensitive to criticism, admit their mistakes and judge themselves. They prefer to work in a team, sharing responsibility with others.
As we can see, this tool essentially repeats Adizes’ theory; choose the tool that is clearer to you.
This is a simple tool that, through guiding questions, allows you to identify unsatisfied internal needs and understand what a person will strive for.
You can read more in this article
We already understand how motivation works, why the employee’s psychology is important, the combination of his strengths and weaknesses, and whether he is suitable for the position (and not the position for him).
But there is an equally important point - do you understand who is needed and why?
We very rarely hear a clear answer to this question, and even less often do we hear the same vision from the director to the direct supervisor.
Also, from experience, most managers want a “universal Superman”. The result is rapid burnout and turnover.
Next is a small algorithm from us:
1. Digitize your organizational structure as it is: who does what, who depends on whom, what is the balance of tasks, what is the key product of the work. This way you will see your work from the outside. You realize many problems.
2. Determine the goals of your department.
3. Reengineer:
carry out a division of labor and separate routine operations from “creative” work
Firstly, if you hire a powerful creative person or manager-entrepreneur, you will kill his interest and drive with small things very quickly.
Secondly, at the beginning of the 20th century it was realized that 10 generalists would do less than 10 specialists with a distribution of tasks. This is the assembly line principle that led to the 2nd Industrial Revolution. And believe me, your office is not much different from a factory.
Thirdly, it is easier and cheaper to find a specialist in one field than a universal hero.
divide all processes into 3 groups in relation to the value they create for your client: useful, necessary and losses. Try to optimize and eliminate waste (hello from lean manufacturing).
4. Finally, describe the functionality of the new employee, areas of responsibility and who you need.
Based on his PAEI theory, Adizes developed recommendations for what functionality is needed by whom ( see above )
5. When applying for a job, enter an internship in related departments
Your employee will get an idea of how the whole process works, what his role is, will get rid of the thought “here we are moving mountains, and they are chasing tea,” and will establish informal communication with those on whom his work will depend.
We also recommend an interesting video
What will we get in the end?
A systematic solution to the initial causes of turnover is the mismatch of personnel with their tasks, leapfrog in operational tasks and distribution of responsibilities.
You will initially understand the motivation of your people, what is important to them and how to manage them, and you will increase productivity.
When digitalizing your business, you will already be prepared, you will be able to go through the process faster and get better results.
Let's talk about delegation again.
But not from the perspective of short-term effects and unloading of the manager, but about how it helps to unite the team and increase motivation.
First, let's refresh our memory. Delegation of authority is the process of transferring part of a manager's functions to other employees to achieve specific organizational goals.
Let us also remind you that this tool is only suitable for mature employees, with SMART tasks, compliance with 3 main conditions (authority, resources, responsibility), the presence of control points and with the Kanban approach (we see the load and do not overload with the list of incoming tasks).
With this technique we enable the mechanism of non-financial motivation.
First, employees begin to feel the importance of their work. They better see their value to the organization and feel involved in the overall success.
Secondly, people begin to more clearly understand the connection between the effort expended and the result. They try on the role of a leader for themselves, and begin to think less from the position of “the boss is a fool and doesn’t understand anything.”
Thirdly, when receiving a “more interesting” job that requires more intellectual effort, the employee experiences emotional satisfaction after achieving results. It also encourages development and learning.
Fourth, the team begins to feel that they are trusted. This is a powerful mechanism that triggers internal responsibility.
Fifthly, people begin to communicate more informally within the team and with adjacent departments, as a result there is unity, exchange of experience, and the story of “here we work, and they drink tea” is eliminated.
In general, in classical management theory, delegation of authority pursues the following main goals:
Freeing up the delegator’s time to solve tasks in which it is more difficult or impossible to replace him;
Increasing the motivation of those to whom powers are delegated;
Increasing trust in the work team;
Checking employees for diligence.
At the same time, it is important to understand that responsibility cannot be delegated; the manager is ultimately responsible for everything, which is why control points + visualization are important (the same Trello will help you. This is primarily to help you see the problem at an early stage.
Discipline
We have already talked about how motivation and psychology work. And the issue of discipline in working with motivation is very important. What happens when there is no discipline?
The manager spends more time and resources
You have to train an employee to suit you. But this takes time and effort, and there is a high probability that it will not work out at all. All education occurs in childhood, up to 5 years.
Discrediting the manager, demotivating the team, missing project deadlines
Even if you train such an employee to suit you, then when interacting with other employees on whom he does not depend, breakdowns in agreements will begin. Ultimately, this will lead to demotivation of other employees, failure to meet project deadlines and, ultimately, discredit the manager.
In our experience, it is better to initially select people with discipline. We use Adizes theory for this. The P and A functions are responsible for discipline. Therefore, it is necessary for any candidate and team member to have these functions at least at a basic level.
Punishment
Now it is very important to note the main thing - the “rules” of the game must first be announced and then accepted.
We have often come across stories where people committed misconduct either in a new situation or in an unspecified one, for which they received severe punishments according to the principle “I could have guessed it myself” or “it’s obvious.” And in their well-founded opinion, the punishments are unfair.
The effect is demotivation and turnover.
Therefore, we can recommend the following algorithm:
1. It is necessary to make sure that the employee knows the “rules of the game”
2. You need to analyze and understand that this is not an error in the process/technology. That you, as a manager, did everything to prevent mistakes from happening
For example, we had a case where a defective finished product was discovered in a neighboring division. It turned out that the reason was packaging technology. And the introduction of planning meetings made it possible to get rid of mass delays at the system level. This is also a very simple and extremely effective tool, but for some reason almost everyone began to forget about it.
Many successful companies, even in IT, do 2 planning meetings a day.
And using Kanban visualization, for example, in Trello or Jira, people already clearly know their tasks for the day and can make their suggestions. At the end of the day, when preparing a report, they themselves begin to realize what they have done. Plus there is a designated time and a stable habit is developed.
Therefore, first ask yourself, what have you done in terms of organizing the process to prevent this from happening? Is your feedback from employees disrupted? Can they contact you at an early stage of a problem, or does your toxicity lead to being “swept under the rug”? In 90% of cases the problem lies in this plane
But what to do if an employee deliberately sabotages work?
3. You need to talk to an employee one-on-one. It is important to understand the reasons for his behavior, explain his guilt, so that in the end he himself admits his guilt.
4. The employee assigns his own punishment. If the person is adequate, and you have correctly argued your position, then he will choose a proportionate punishment for himself and will be aware of it. And if he is cunning, you understand who you are dealing with
5. Communication and the entire “debriefing” is carried out as early as possible, ideally on the same day or the next
How does this mechanism work?
At the organizational level, we remove blurriness, lack of a plan and gray areas. That is, we provide system conditions
the principle of fairness is observed. A person does not have the feeling that he was punished by a tyrant.
the employee is better aware of the cause-and-effect relationships and the relationship between misconduct and punishment.
during a conversation, there is a high probability that when discussing the situation you will understand that you yourself were wrong. For example, the task was formulated unclearly or incorrectly.
What does this ultimately lead to? To reduce turnover, increase the level of performance discipline, and respect from subordinates.
There is, of course, a downside to this approach. This does not work with particularly “smart” and cunning: some sophisticated managers and employees, and also if the team is much smarter than you and you have discredited yourself.
In such cases, an authoritarian style without unnecessary conversations is often very effective.
As an example of this approach, let's take an excerpt from Evgeny Bazhov's book "COACHING. The Tao of Career Growth. A Practical Guide"
For example, there was a case when, due to the oversight of one technician, sanitary standards were violated on a farm and the factory could receive a fine from the SEZ for a low-quality product. The boss of this technician was rude and wanted reprisals. A conflict broke out that could have caused downtime during the busiest time of sales before the New Year. The problem threatened to become serious. The boss wanted to impose a large fine and fire the technician. And the technician himself already wanted to leave. Previously, Lee would have taken pity on the technician, thereby ruining her relationship with his boss. From a management point of view, this would be wrong and would lay a time bomb: you can commit a violation and avoid punishment. However, having acquired new skills in coaching, Lee competently conducted a conversation with both the technician and his boss. She supported the boss, agreeing that he was certainly right and that this flagrant violation should be severely punished. But then she asked if they could now lose a specialist? Will it be easy to find an adequate replacement during the busiest time? These questions puzzled the boss.
The conversation with the technician was structured differently. Li told him what such a mistake in work could lead to, and about the punishment that was prescribed according to the rules for the factory and the entire company. She also reported that the manager was tearing up and lashing out, because he would be the one who would bear personal responsibility. I asked if I could understand him. The technician accepted these arguments. And then she invited the technician to choose his own punishment for this violation. And he proposed an even more severe punishment than his boss initially wanted to apply. Lee only had to show herself wise and generous by softening his choice to the deprivation of an annual bonus and a verbal reprimand. So, instead of large losses, she received two loyal employees and increased attention to the quality of the process in the future. She has had no problems on this farm and factory since then.
Factors that increase the strength of security motives:
Strict operational control of work results
Irreversibility and automaticity of imposed sanctions
The shortest possible time limits for issuing sentences
Personnel receive information about the procedure for issuing sanctions before starting work operations
Sanctions apply to all persons, including the manager
Factors that reduce the strength of security motives:
Using a system for monitoring personnel work activity based on final results
Dependence of the sanctions system on the will of the manager
Sanctions are issued only on specific dates (for example, once a month based on the results of work in the reporting period)
Personnel learn about the procedure for imposing sanctions only upon completion of work operations
Certain categories of workers are never subject to sanctions
Now there will be simple recommendations on what to do. Remember that the end goal is a stable and motivated team. Stable is 5% turnover per year.
Taking into account the fact that the new generation is more mobile, plus these are extremely changing times, this figure could reach 10-15%. But this is already at the limit.
Anything higher is a signal of poor management quality. Even if this is the “norm” for the organization, you can change the situation. Verified. So think and learn.
The exception is if this is your conscious policy, supported by a clear division of labor with simple operations and provided training. An example would be McDonald's, or... the army.
At the same time , all managers in the world want people to put the interests of the organization above personal interests, this will never happen!
There is only one way out - to sell the idea that if a person is focused on achieving the company's goals, then his personal goals will be satisfied:
he will have a stable job and his family will be safe;
he does interesting work and can influence the entire organization, he is important, and does not do work for the table
his successes are celebrated and recognized
he clearly understands what his salary depends on, understands how he can increase it
create conditions where a person does not need to think “what do they want from me?”
In addition to motivation, discipline and fair punishments are also important, which are achieved through regular management practices, clear business processes and an organizational structure with a description of functions and responsibilities, and the final product of activity.
Examples of regular management practices include:
transparent metrics;
clear plans for the day, week, month.
An induction program is also needed to set the right expectations from the start.
So, simple recommendations:
Make the company's goals and the "rules" of the game accessible and understandable to everyone right at the entrance when you hire an employee. This also affects motivation systems. Your people must understand the cause-and-effect relationship of effort - result - reward. And the reward should be valuable to them. To do this, you need to understand people: their profile , level of maturity .
Combine financial and non-financial incentives, do not go overboard. What is important for people is salary with working conditions, and the content of work with feedback about successes or mistakes, with the opportunity to reveal themselves: gain new knowledge, take responsibility.
Simplify processes through lean manufacturing ,digitalization and automation , let people improve their work themselves
Conduct regular planning meetings to regularly monitor key tasks and maintain discipline and meetings for up to 40 minutes (the algorithm is available here ).
Stop micromanagement and delegate authority to “mature” employees, encourage the exchange of experience, informal communication between employees and teams.
Be patient and encourage experiences, even negative ones. Errors, provided that their causes are analyzed, are an excellent teacher. This is the only way people will not be afraid to learn and become mature and take responsibility.
Follow the rule: 80% positive and 20% negative. If there is more of the second component, hygiene factors will be violated and the mental health of the team will suffer, which means people will start to leave, or simply hold on to their place and “not shine.”
Do not put functional experience as an absolute priority, look at the strengths and weaknesses of the individual. This way you will understand what is valuable to an employee and how his motivation works, what he can do in the future and where he can prove himself. When you buy experience, you buy the past without knowing all the reasons for its formation. Experience is valuable if a person constantly learns and expands his horizons, and these are soft skills.
Share the labor and realize your strengths. There are no perfect people. Creativity and routine should not be mixed (except for educational purposes). This way you will increase productivity, make your team more stable and motivated, and save time and money by not having to look for “supermen.”
Be fair and punish as a last resort. Avoid the formulations “well, it’s clear”, “I could have thought of it myself.” This is a complete discredit of you as a leader. And in general, punishment is primarily a minus for the leader - he has not built a system, he does not know his people, he has not outlined the rules of the game.
Plan and involve performers in planning. This makes people feel more confident, take responsibility for deadlines and quality, and feel a sense of ownership and power. But remember - the plan is not a dogma, it can and should change, but there must always be an initial plan, in order to then analyze deviations and causes, and learn.
If possible, use SMART tasks and determine the employee’s maturity level, communicate with him based on your plans for him.
You can use a flexible work start schedule, for example, from 9 to 12 and the end of work, and also a hybrid work option (2 days offline, 3 days remotely). Arrange informal meetings (meetings/team building) and communicate with them sincerely and honestly.
If possible, organize a recreation area. And not only sofas, coffee, cookies, but also the opportunity to relax in silence and relax.
Intra-corporate training, training in educational institutions and on platforms (if there is a resource for its organization), working with mentors is also an excellent tool for maintaining motivation, engagement and stimulation. This is rare and appreciated by many.
Bonuses for ideas that bring profit, and there is no need to set a ceiling. Also, bonuses for achieving OKR goals.
Social package (lunch payment, gyms). It doesn't work very well in many companies, but in large ones where everything is cool, based on collecting ideas from employees, it works unambiguously.
Public recognition of merit (eulogies, diplomas, mini-gifts, dinner with the head for the best employee) is also one of the best tools for non-financial incentives.
Options / shares of the company / share in the authorized capital of the most loyal and valuable employees.
A loud job title. This is how people feel more important, and they have an incentive to develop. Even if they leave, they understand that this is a plus for them in the future
The right to make decisions and actions independently in the area of their responsibility and slightly beyond it, without unnecessary approvals.
PS our main advice is to learn to communicate and listen. It is very difficult, especially to consider and admit that you are the one who is wrong.
PPS, using the tips above, we reduced turnover from 90% to 5-10%. And people began to work independently, without kicks or supervision. And it doesn’t matter what nationality or level of education.
To conclude, let's quote Peter Drucker from his book The Effective Leader :
All this is obvious, you say. Then why is the right approach so rare? Why are it so rare to find leaders who can make the most of the strengths of other people, and especially of their subordinates? Why did even Lincoln choose generals three times based on their shortcomings, but only the fourth time based on their merits?
The main reason is that the manager’s tasks include filling a vacancy, and not selecting a person to perform a particular job well. Traditionally, the basis for hiring is always a free workplace. By acting in this way, you are proceeding from the false principle of finding the most flexible employee who will not claim anything. And such people usually turn out to be mediocre.
A well-publicized “cure” for this is to structure work assignments to suit the personality traits of the applicants. But this is even worse than the disease itself - except perhaps for the smallest and simplest organizations. The work must be objectively necessary, that is, determined by the task, and not by the person assigned to perform it.
You can’t change everyone’s job and responsibilities just because a new person comes to a certain place. A job change will almost certainly create an even greater mismatch between the job responsibilities and the employee's abilities. This will lead to the fact that in order to resolve an issue with one employee, dozens of other people will have to be uprooted and moved within the organization.
Comments