We recently attended Deloitte’s 2019 Chief Learning Officer Forum, where a number of learning leaders discussed the idea of feeling “safe” and its impact on workers. One participant made a great point: the very people we rely on to implement change in our organizations—middle managers—often experience heavy financial burdens due to aging parents, children’s college tuition, and/or debts carried over from past mortgages or higher education. A need for financial safety, he posited, might prevent the very experimentation and agility we want from our workers. Their need for job security could override any desire to take risks, innovate, or experiment in the flow of work.1 (A recent Deloitte survey found that financial topics like job security, retirement, and debt are among top employee stressors. Our colleague Pete DeBellis wrote on how to address this via a rewards strategy.)2
Posted by Kathi Enderes on November 12, 2018.
“Science confirms: people are not pets,” claims a recent article.1 The key finding of this piece was also the topic of the book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, by Daniel H. Pink,2 which asserts that people cannot bribe others into doing what they want. Study after study has confirmed that attempts to motivate people with extrinsic rewards to perform better, work harder, or behave differently tend to be fruitless at best—and are often counterproductive. So why do so many organizations still use the old “pay for performance” moniker? Why do they spend hours and hours designing systems to evaluate performance and differentiate performance levels with rewards?
I (Amy) remember my first day on a new job — it was 1999. I walked into my office, had a computer put in front me, and was promptly whisked off to take care of formalities like fingerprinting and drug testing. That was my onboarding. Fortunately, we’ve come a long way in the last 15 years. Today onboarding is recognized as a critically important talent strategy because it can dramatically affect both “hard” factors such as productivity, retention, and costs and those elusive “soft” factors such as employer reputation and referrals that can be a tremendous advantage in a tight talent market.