Just this last week Facebook came out with a new interface for it’s mobile apps (I use the iPhone and iPad app) and I commented that while the added features were cool from a techie standpoint it felt very cluttered from a user standpoint.   I had to take a few minutes to figure out how things had changed.  While it didn’t take long I must admit I was a little frustrated that I had to take the time to deal with it…it feels to me that they’re starting to stray from their simplistic approach that in my opinion gave them a huge edge over MySpace.    Why do I need to know in real time that Sally just liked John’s picture of the dinner he just prepared?  Why does Facebook get to put what they think is the most relative in my news feed?   What happened to the news feed button, etc.?  The ads on the web site I realize are necessary as I don’t want to have to pay for it but I must admit I was a little insulted at the ad for a CPAP machine that came up recently…they seem to know things about me that I’m not willing to accept.  Granted there is a lot of information that is being processed but their approach has always been to keep it simple and those days are gone.

What does this have to do with Perks or incentive programs in general?    The answer is simple.   Yes I said simple…consistency would apply as well.  For example, Perks’ platform has the ability to take in data from multiple sources and formats, in real-time or batch, and apply algorithms that turn all this data into a single view for the user.   In the first 5 years of our existence we ran very complex sales campaigns for a major computer manufacturer that at times ramped up to 10-15 campaigns a month.   Users began to get fatigue from all the contest and qualifiers and eventually just started checking out.   I remember being so proud at how our platform could push so much information at a single user but the truth is it was information overload.  Just because you have the technology doesn’t mean that you have to use it.  As Perks has evolved we’ve stressed the importance of keeping a simple consistent view for the user (even if there is tons of data that back up their numbers).  Also, keeping the program fresh doesn’t mean changing the look and feel every month or quarter.   The real trick is to update and refresh campaigns to meet the changing needs of a client while still using the same format, navigation, and data points.   The only way to do this efficiently is to have a complete understanding of the clients goals both short term AND long term so that and changes to the site are minimal.   I’m sure Facebook has done an exhaustive amount of user experience testing but I have to wonder if they’ve truly listened to the feedback.

So all of this just boils down to a “simple” fact.  Perks is smarter than Facebook.

request a demo

Powered by Bookmarkify™

His sum total of experience in program design is that he’s been part of incentive and bonus plans before. And while that might be enough experience to form an opinion, it would be ill-advised to base your company policies on his input. There is more to motivation, and the design of incentive programs, that drive performance than simply being part of a program in the past.

The big issue with this article is:

He lumps performance and incentive programs using non-cash awards into the compensation discussion. It is a common mistake, and can be forgiven, but no one who understands how compensation and non-cash incentives address very different performance issue would make that grouping.

The rest of his “rules” or reasons why bonuses don’t work are pretty spot on, if an exercise in stating the obvious. But by starting out comparing compensation-based bonuses and commissions to non-cash incentives he shows he really doesn’t understand the difference. And there is one.

Commissions/Bonus/Compensation

Your compensation strategy relative to pay – whether salary or variable – is designed to allow employees to live, work, buy a house, go to dinner, manage life maintenance chores. Done well, most employees will give you what they think that package of value is worth to them. Less compensation – less value to the employee – the lower the minimum standard of performance will be. Compensation is transactional and fungible. Meaning – the employee will do some calculus in their brain when they evaluate a compensation system and compare the money to the work – and then compare that equation to another offer/company/position. There is no emotion in that process. It’s cold, hard, transactional and impersonal.

Non-Cash

On the other hand – once you’ve established what you think is the value exchange for “minimum standard of performance” – which is what compensation really is – you know need to find ways to drive incremental discretionary effort. And that is why you need non-cash incentives and recognition. That creates an emotional, social relationship with the employee. The employee can’t do the same math in their head. What’s a recognition “event” worth in money? Who knows – like the credit card commercial says – it could be priceless if done correctly.

Don’t confuse compensation with connection

Many people who give advice in the incentive and reward space confuse the issues of compensation and the issue of connection. It is easier to deal with life if you believe people only have one gear – money – and that gear should always be engaged to get the best work.
The truth is – like your car you have many different gears – all influenced by different things.
Next time you want advice on incentives – come to us.

GOOD ADVICE (Part 2)

In our next blog post, we will give you the good advice that the author of the subject of this post, unfortunately, didn’t deliver. Next up, 10 THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN IMPLEMENTING YOUR INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

Stay tuned, for the next installment.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

“Ten!” Lily yelled, stopped and pointed at her younger sister. “No fair! Silverware doesn’t count!”

“Yes, it does! It counts! You have to go just as far to put it away,” Helen said, a bit of exasperation in her voice.

“No, it doesn’t. A spoon doesn’t count as much as a plate.”

Helen frowned and puffed a little air to get her hair out of her face. “It should count double. You have to go from the dishwasher to the cabinet and then open the drawer. That’s one more step than just putting away a cup.”

Lily paused, looking at her. She appeared to think it over. Then she shot toward the dishwasher and grabbed a fork. Helen was right on her heels.

“What the $@!&% are you two doing?” I think I omitted the H-E-double toothpick. I hope I did. But I was thinking it.

“The dishes.”

“Uh, no, you’re not.”

Helen looked at me, cocked her head, and held up a coffee cup. “Yes we are, daddy. Look!”

“I mean the running. The numbers.”

“It’s the dishes game, daddy.”

“Can we just do the dishes without the running? The yelling? You’re gonna break some china they way you guys are jumping around.” I looked at the silverware tray in the dishwasher. “And when you start on the cutlery, you’re gonna kill yourselves.”

They dropped their heads and turned back to the chore with far less enthusiasm.

The incident started me thinking.

Back when I was fresh out of high-school, I worked on a farm for a summer, digging post holes. Not real exciting work, but the pay was great – for an eighteen year old – and I had a “company” car, a sweet beige El Camino that I drove for the summer. But if you’ve ever run a fence-line, digging post holes, it’s deathly dull work, despite its strenuousness. My “partner” was Jim Stevens. Everyone called him “Bo.”

It took maybe a single day before we made a game out of it. The game was this: we’d both start digging and after an hour, we’d see how many post holes we’d each have – the loser bought lunch. Or beer, after work.

By the end of the summer, both my back and triceps were a solid mass of muscle and our boss was amazed at how many miles of pasture we’d fenced in. In the interim, we kept our minds – and our friendship – stimulated.

And that’s the deal. Humans are creative, inquisitive creatures. We like puzzles, we like figuring out the roots of things. It’s in our nature to want to make games and competitions of our endeavors.

How does this relate to incentives?

According to Incentive Research Foundation, incentive budgets have declined since 2008, but they are now tentatively rising. This is important, because in these lean years, incentive program managers have to find ways to motivate and engage their audiences without expanding their expenses. And so comes an interest in gamification.

In simplified terms, gamification is using game mechanics – accrued points, badges, levels of “experience” – to incentivize target audiences by creating a token economy. This economy is based on three things (check out how similar it is to current incentive and engagement psychology): first, there needs to be a specified target behavior; second, there are tokens that can be exchanged with material reinforcers; and third, back-up reinforcers, which are the services, the goods or the privileges that the tokens can be traded for. (A.E. Kazdin : The token economy: a decade later. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1982. http://tinyurl.com/3c76ovj)

This bolsters the current thought underlying incentive trends and online incentive solutions. Perks.com, being at the forefront of the incentive and engagement field, is paying close attention to these developments.
Games like FarmVille and MafiaWars are burgeoning on Facebook. Game inspired geolocation social network services like Gowalla and Foursquare are surging in popularity. As the fabric of your life becomes more meshed with your smart device, gamification will begin to inform many aspects of your day-to-day life.
Whether it will be checking in on Foursquare ten times in a month at your local eatery to receive a discount, or employers implementing a badge system or token economy for top performers in their company, fostering their desire to excel, to succeed – technology is changing the way we look at engagement and motivation.

Please request a demo and let us show you how we’re changing the game.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

In Reasons 2 Reward we follow Max, the new park manager, as he attempts to revitalize the park by revitalizing the work environment.

I like business parables. They teach through storytelling and we often learn best through storytelling. This parable has numerous workplace lessons to teach, 28 highlighted points that range from provide feedback to create reward systems that people would aspire to achieve and be proud to receive. Overall, the book reinforces what managers can do to engage employees.

The story does have a couple of inconsistencies that are minor, but there is one point where,  from my perspective, manager Max really misses the mark in a significant way.

Here is the excerpt:

“Have you been recognizing your team in some way Barry?” Max asked.

“That’s for sissies. My men hate that sort of stuff, especially getting pointed out in front of all the other guys. They would rather die than be embarrassed like that.”

Barry is a master at sidestepping the question. Max asked if he was recognizing in some way. Barry responds that his ‘guys’ don’t like public recognition. It would have been a great place to acknowledge that not everyone wants recognition given publicly, that this preference is driven by both culture and personality, and is very real.

Max could have then offered options for recognizing the entire team and for giving private individual recognition, while insisting that Barry recognize his people in some way. Instead, Max responds:

“I think you would be surprised Barry. Everyone appreciates a thank you.”

Maybe I’m not reading it as it was intended, but this seems to imply that recognition has to be public and that everyone wants it this way. It seems Max thinks Barry would be surprised to learn that everyone likes public recognition, I know I would be surprised to learn this. I can personally think of dozens of examples where this was not true. Here a few from my experience:

• The company that posted employee of the month pictures in the front foyer and found that their predominantly Asian workforce started coming in the back entrance!
• The VP that became sullen when acknowledged in a management meeting but became animated when acknowledged one to one.
• The engineers who threatened to stop performing if they were recognized in the type of flashy ceremony loved by the sales team!

Public vs. private is a recognition preference. You can ignore the preference. You can choose not to recognize the preference. You can create a work culture where everyone receives public recognition and many people will love it. In some industries, most people will love it. Keep in mind though, that those that don’t love it will leave as soon as they have the opportunity.

Reasons 2 Reward - eighty pages of lessons and six sentences that make me feel the need to disagree, to start a discussion.

The thing about parables, they are open to interpretation, they get us talking and thinking. I imagine that every reader will find something in this book that provokes discussion and that is a good thing!

Top Small Companies

The annual workplace awards offered by some of our top business magazines are a great way to  benchmark against other companies. One of these is Inc. Magazine.

Each year, Inc. Magazine and Winning Workplaces collaborate to recognize “Top Small Company Workplaces.” The recognized companies are selected for their corporate cultures that foster a productive work environment and satisfied employees.

They are now accepting applications for the 2011 Inc. list. To see if your company qualifies for the award please visit: https://tsw.winningworkplaces.org/ With the Inc.award, you begin by completing an application that looks at the aspects of your business that affect your work environment including things as diverse as: benefits, mission, and recognition programs. If you qualify as a finalist, your employees will also participate in a survey. All the information gathered from the application and survey is used to select the best companies.

Why do so many companies participate in these best/top competitions?

In addition to the information that helps them make their companies better, top scores bring positive publicity that attracts top performers, something that is critical to company success.

The winners of the Inc.Top Companies will be featured in the June 2011 issue of Inc. Magazine. In addition winners will be featured on Inc.’s and Winning Workplaces’ websites and will gain additional exposure through a nationally distributed press release.

Could your company be a Top Small Business?

Money isn’t everything.

You can’t buy happiness.

These sayings have been around a long, long time because they are true. Interesting how governments are just now paying attention.

Money only a provides small part of what determines how satisfied we are. Countries worry about GDP or gross domestic product. Employees think about the paycheck.

Business realized years ago that what employees really needed to be successful was a lot more broadly focused than compensation. Today most medium to large companies hold annual or biennial surveys to determine lots of “fuzzy metrics” that have been proven to affect the bottom-line. They ask about satisfaction with:

• the relationship with the supervisor,
• the level of trust and transparency with senior management,
• their understanding of how their jobs fit into the big picture,
• opportunities to grow and develop, and of course
• whether they feel they are valued by the organization.

Companies care because they know these fuzzy factors significantly affect engagement. They use the information from these surveys to change policies and behaviors.

Governments are beginning understand that there are similar factors that affect their citizens’ outlooks and their countries’ outcomes. It will be interesting to see what they do with the information.

What are your thoughts?

In other words, if the award is impersonal but usable how valued would it be?

My response was, basically, that impersonal but usable is better than unusable or unwanted. His question had reminded me of an experience that I had awhile back.

I had traveled to a speaking engagement. The client was paying me to be there, and I certainly didn’t need a gift in order to feel appreciated.

At the end of my presentation the person that had introduced me came back up on stage to publicly thank me and hand me a gift card. This ritual was repeated with each presenter.

When I got back to my room and looked at the card I discovered it was for a store I had never heard of. A quick Internet search showed that it was a regional store. It didn’t have an online presence, and I wasn’t going to be there long enough to pay the store a visit. For me, the card was unusable.

When I returned home I found a deserving recipient who could use the card, sent it to her, and forgot all about it,  until I got this question.

Is an award that can be redeemed for pretty much anything as valued as one that is preselected?

We know that a gift especially selected with us in mind is the ideal. Often though, this just isn’t possible. So, the question comes down to this:

Which is better?

1) An award that can be redeemed just about anywhere for anything - certainly impersonal - or

2) A random gift that may or may not be something the recipient wants or can use?

If you get lucky and get it right, option two is obviously better. Get it wrong and, while both are impersonal, one isn’t even usable.

What is the message inherent in each gift?

The first option, usable but impersonal, is actually quite neutral. The message presented with the gift will tilt the scale to the positive or the negative.  The second option, impersonal and unusable, sends a message beyond the presentation of the gift, and that is, “we really didn’t think about you and we don’t care what you want.”

In my example, I would have been left with a more positive impression with no gift than with a gift that didn’t take me into consideration at all.

When you are in a position where you need to provide the same award/gift to many people think about the following:

• What would they all value?
• Will the award/gift provide a memento of the event/accomplishment?
• What message will we provide along with the award?

Solo professionals wear many hats

If, like me,  you wear many hats in your organization you know how challenging that can be!

For those of you who are the “HR department” in your organization, you are expected to be an expert in many areas: benefits, compensation, dispute resolution, coaching and more. You have to admit, you wear a lot of hats.

Solo HR practitioners, if you work in Northern California  get to South San Francisco Conference Center for the NCHRA  full day conference for solo HR practitioners. You will learn about compensation, mediation, recognition, and more.

I will be speaking on The Recognition Factor: A Key Variable in the Engagement Equation and providing lots of ideas and examples of what really works  (but I will probably be there without the hats)!

For information: click here

Stop by a say hi if you attend!

Is the economy affecting employees’ sense of being valued? Are the lack of raises, reduction in benefits, and increased workload having their toll? People who don’t feel valued aren’t usually engaged or motivated, so knowing the effect of economic changes on sense of value is important information for companies struggling to stay productive.

Over the course of  six weeks Make Their Day conducted a survey that asked:

“Do you feel more or less valued than a year ago?”

Of the 247 people who responded, the largest percentage (42%) said they feel less valued than they did one year ago. In contrast 31 percent reported no change and 28 percent said they feel more valued. Given the circumstances in most organizations: cutbacks, downsizing, extreme budgeting, it doesn’t seem surprising that people might feel less valued than they did a year ago. What you might find surprising is why they feel less valued.

The most sited cause of significant change in the way they feel was not pay, benefits, or work overload. It was the behavior of the manager or supervisor (49%)!

It always seems to come down to the relationship of the individual to the manager. People can tolerate just about anything but a manager who doesn’t seem to care. Here are a few comments from respondents who stated that they feel significantly less valued now than a year ago:

My manager is less positive.

There is less communication.

Managers are too busy trying to be heroes to their managers.

My manager is angry and disengaged.

These comments seem to indicate that there are more than a few managers who also feel less valued. Organizations often forget the importance of manager engagement in maintaining employee engagement. The following comment is from a respondent who says he/she feels significantly more valued, shows the value of engaged managers:

We have had no cost of living increase for two years in a row, the bonus plan has been stopped, and staff meetings no longer have lunch provided. My “living” costs continue to go up even though my bring-home income has decreased. This, obviously, does not feel good.

A few months ago we (”the staff”) put together three pages of grievances for and about “the management” along with suggestions for improvement. The management responded immediately and positively! We’ve been working with an outside consultant to ensure that everyone treats each other with dignity and respect. What a turn-around! It was risky, because there’s good talent out there that could potentially replace us. The way management handled this has made all of us feel more valued, as you can imagine.

This respondent doesn’t say what the grievances were, but clearly feeling respected was at the core of their concerns. Their managers’ engagement and interest in making improvements in spite of the economy really turned around a difficult situation. I hope employees recognized their managers for  coming through for them!

To see the results of this survey click here.

]]> http://maketheirday.com/blog/?feed=rss2&p=1751 0 http://maketheirday.com/blog/?p=1895 http://maketheirday.com/blog/?p=1895#comments Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:17:09 +0000 cventrice http://maketheirday.com/blog/?p=1895 I just finished reading Medium Raw by Anthony Bourdain. When I started this book, I never figured it would end up getting a mention in my blog, but you never know where stories of great workplaces will come from.

Towards the end of the book is the story of an employee at the celebrated restaurant, Le Bernadin. Le Bernadin is considered one of the top fish restaurants in the country, if not the top. How does a restaurant get to be the best? I believe the story that Bourdain tells about an extraordinary fish cleaner provides some clues:

1) The fish cleaner, Justo, makes a decent salary (unheard of in a restaurant).

2) His work is results-based. He leaves when he is done rather than when is hours are up.

3) The chef at Le Bernadin treats everyone the same (Justo compares this to his last place where they “didn’t even say good morning.”

4) Everyone addresses everyone else, regardless of position, as “chef.” They consider it a sign of respect.

5) They work with a common vision, that each piece of fish represents the chef’s reputation. Quality really is the focus. They are striving for perfection.

Results focus and respect. It is a winning combination wherever you find it.