I am strongly in favour of defining the "outputs" required of any group
and measuring their collective performance on the overall output. As long
as I get the reasonable output I asked for, I can rate the group well.
The real question for LO is how do I change that output in the next period
to reflect the benefit I should be getting from LO. If the output does not
continuously improve, then LO is a hoax. By rewarding the rate of
inprovement, I can start to create an inherent reward culture in which LO
can flourish?
I also get everyone helping each other rather than competing to look
better than the next person (or the next group). This has a downside in
that everyone competes with their own performance in the previous period
and this can create exhaustion or tread mill burnout BUT I have never
found an better alternative!
--"Keith Cowan" <Kcowan@orion.GlobalDEN.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>