Why Should I Bother Staying?
[Cartoon courtesy of Grantland Cartoons]
There are some companies that were truly broke that decided they couldn’t give their workers cost-of-living adjustments; and then there were those companies that were struggling, but could have afforded (with a little executive-level sacrifice) to give their employees a financial boost, but chose not to. That choice may soon (if there’s poetic justice) come home to roost, as the cheapness they thought they could get away with (so as to not shave off a million from their already-multi-million dollar salaries) results in the loss of the talent they depend on to carry out their plans.
What’s your company doing about it? I was just talking the other day with a friend who lamented with me the stupidity of companies that equate incentive and motivation strategies with slacking off. They seem to believe you can’t be working if you’re enjoying yourself. At one company, for instance, workers need to make up for time out of the office that they spend traveling on behalf of the company. The problem is the trips weren’t directly related to the worker’s primary job. They were great career opportunities that afforded the person a chance to explore the world, and, so, therefore, have to be paid for somehow (whether in vacation time or extra time working) lest they—gasp—be seen as incentives. Would it be the end of the world to allow a motivated, high-achieving employee to take advantage of a great work-related opportunity to travel without worrying it will be interpreted as an incentive? You laugh at this extreme example, but it’s a true story related to me by my friend this past weekend.
The backlash against incentives, and other rewards-oriented
retention strategies, was too broad and over-generalized. It isn’t that lavish
incentives aren’t needed; it’s that the wrong people were getting them. The
executives who already earn million dollar-plus salaries? They’re not the ones who need the
fabulous opportunities and luxury afforded by incentive travel, gifts, and
end-of-the-year bonuses. Those employees who enjoyed the big rewards already
were being rewarded with big-time salaries—for jobs they happened not to be
doing too well given the hobbled state of their companies.
The executive retreats are great for leadership development
and strategizing, as it’s good for brainstorming to get your “strategizers”
(the ones you pay to think of ideas they don’t have to do the work for) out of
the office, and it doesn’t hurt if the strategizing happens to take place in,
say, Maui, HI, versus, Hackensack, NJ, but that’s not where retention and
motivation focus should be aimed. Instead, train the retention efforts on those
who do the work to carry out the plans, and occasionally come up with great
ideas (when you’re open enough to hear those ideas and give them a try). Why
waste time incentivizing and retaining those who do nothing but attend meetings
and make speeches announcing their ideas?
With the economy not likely to soar for a while, it’s time to drop from
the payroll (or at least the high-priced retention efforts) those whose only
job function is “high-level strategy.”
In the midst of our lamenting, my friend and I wondered what
it would be like if companies with low budgets and concerned public relations
departments at the very least treated high-performing workers to dinner at a gourmet restaurant once every six
months. The events could be called “Hard Worker Dinners” as opposed to “High-Potential”
dinners (“high-potential” has come to mean little more than a well-connected
club at some companies). These events might involve, for instance, the company
reserving a room at a great local restaurant to treat maybe 50 top workers from the entry and mid-level ranks (those not
already rewarded with astronomical salaries). Those given this honor would be
recognized in a mass e-mail to the whole company to inspire and shame lazier
workers. It’s hard to believe, but even in this cutthroat economy with its
dearth of jobs, there are still lazy people getting paid for full-time
employment. I’ve seen it myself.
The worst part about retention and motivation/incentive
strategies, in addition to their enjoyment too often reserved for those who can
afford to treat themselves, is the ones the company seeks to hold onto lots of
times has nothing to do with hard work. A lot of times the ones the company
bends over to please are just relatives or friends of the executive board and
well connected. Is that too bleak an assessment of mine, or do you think I’m on
target?
Then, of course, you have to consider those who are not relatives or friends with the “right” people. There are those who got where they are by agreeing with
everything. It sounds but bad, but don’t worry, that’s your next generation of
high-level strategizers.
What are you doing to retain your best workers? Are your retention strategies aimed at
the employees who can help your company the most?