Responding to the thread in general and to the statement below (from
LO21137) --
>Any system that doesn't pay for performance has drawbacks.
No system pays for performance. Therefore, all systems have drawbacks.
All systems pay. Many systems attempt to establish contingent
relationships between pay and something called performance. Some systems
attempt to measure the extent to which the desired performance is being
obtained. Few systems attempt to measure the effectiveness of the
contingency relationship itself. Thus, some systems are misled because
the performance occurs but is not in fact contingent upon pay. The system
pays, thinking the contingent relationship is effective even though it
isn't. Thus, these systems mistakenly believe in the general
effectiveness of contingent relationships.
Most people, if asked, will utter words indicating they believe in the
effectiveness of rewards and punishment and in the effectiveness of
contingent relationships between these and behavior patterns/job
performance. Most people are mistaken. Thankfully, most people do not
act in accordance with their espoused beliefs.
When pay is contingent on performance, many performers will manage the
contingency not the performance. Some, known to us all as "good
soldiers," will attempt to deliver the desired performance, not because
they're anxious to obtain the contingent pay or other contingent reward
but because they take the contingency as a signal of expectations from on
high and they are bent on honoring those expectations. A few will do what
is communicated as expected by the contingency solely for the purpose of
obtaining the contingent pay or reward.
Performance will at all times reflect what the performer has decided to do
or accomplish. Management direction, pay-for-performance schemes, reward
systems, corporate strategy and objectives and other environmental
conditions and circumstances are merely factors shaping the environment in
which the performer operates. Oftentimes these factors constitute
"disturbances," that is, they get in the way of what the performer is out
to accomplish. Sometimes they don't; either they are consistent or
neutral with respect to the performer's own goals and objectives.
I have absolutely no data to support the rough quantitative distributions
outlined above, however, I would be extremely interested in any sources
that would confirm or disconfirm what I happen to believe very strongly.
Regards,
Fred Nickols
Distance Consulting
http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
nickols@worldnet.att.net
(609) 490-0095
--Fred Nickols <nickols@worldnet.att.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>