The Recognition Index

[Steven Green]

You might think that individual performance is at one end of a spectrum and collaboration is at the other. But both styles of working have one thing in common – engagement.

You can’t collaborate without engaging others. And it’s hard to imagine somebody being a top performer while being disengaged. The leading indicator for engagement is how much praise and recognition employees receive at their jobs.

So, exactly how important is recognition to the workplace? I thought it might be fun to revisit some research put out by The Gallup Organization presented in the style of the Harper’s Index:

• Number of U.S. workers Gallup interviewed for this study: 4 million
• Number of workers estimated to be extremely negative about work or “actively disengaged”: 22 million
• Cost in US dollars due lost productivity, workplace injuries, absences and fraud: 1 trillion
• Average dollars spent on individual rewards, per employee: $40
• Number of times a person will change jobs in her lifetime: 11
• Increase in risk for coronary heart disease by working for a disliked boss: 17%
• Rank of “feeling unappreciated” among reasons for leaving a job: 1

 

[George Mosley]

Sobering picture. Personally, dollar-valued rewards don't affect my engagement at work one way or the other. What does affect me is acknowledgement, not just for my work but for who I am as a person. Talk to me from time to time, and not just about my next project deadline.

[Steven Green]

George - your comment supports the research from such places as MIT and Carnegie Mellon in relation to the desires of knowledge workers. Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose are the real drivers of engagement and not dollar -valued rewards.  Dan Pink does a great job in telling this story in this 10 minute white board video: http://www.pollstream.com/?p=227

 

[Anita Mountain]

As a Transactional Analyst we teach that we all need to be offered recognition.  Recognition is one way in which we get to belong.  Often when we start a new job we return to our old place of work where we are known and can get the recognition we need.  As we start to make contacts in the new place of work we tend to return to the previous place of employment less.  We all need different types of recognition.  For some it will be to be asked about their weekend, for others about their families, others about their work and others will need recognition for who they are, rather than for doing.  In reality we need to be open to a range of recognition but because of the way we have been socialised this will differ from person to person.   Where there is a lack of recognition in the work place people will become demoralised and resentful.  If we want employee engagement we need to find out what recognition works for them and to ensure we give them the recognition they need, not that we are necessarily more at ease in giving.  This is not about manipulation, it is about genuine communication and care for and of others.  However, in reality if people are only given criticism then they are likely to do more of the behaviour that is getting attention - what we give recognition to is what we get - therefore this also happens when we offer positive attention for work well done.  When consulting in organisations I often ask:  What is success around here and how is it given recognition?  What is failure and how is that recognized and how is the good enough person given recognition.  Usually the high fliers get the rewards, the failures are mentored etc. and the good enough person is ignored!  Not good for morale.

[Craig Althof]

Those factoids are ugly, Steven! Real indicators of the importance of the good fight we are embroiled in.

 

Steven, you noted….it’s hard to imagine somebody being a top performer while being disengaged.  

Maybe not unheard of? If you consider engagement being a combination of performance and satisfaction, there is the rare endangered species who must excel in their performance regardless of their level of satisfaction. It may be possible to sustain high performance short-term, but long term the outcome is burnout.

 

Anita, you said: …Usually the high fliers get the rewards, the failures are mentored etc. and the good enough person is ignored!  Not good for morale.

 

This shouldn’t upset the statistical purists out there too much…if level of performance fits a bell curve of normal distribution, the low performers and high performers would occupy opposite tails of the bell curve while the “good enough” are the Great Majority in the middle. A dangerous segment to ignore, ey?

What if the “good enough” are more of a focal point…if that population was positively impacted would not the entire distribution shift to a new, higher midpoint? The high performers would be driven to ‘stay ahead of the pack’ while the tail end of the dog would either try to keep up the rear or fall off completely.

Just thinkin’.

[Steven Green]

Craig and Anita,

 

Thanks for the thoughtful contributions to this discussion.  To Anita's point, I agree that there has to be a variety in the types of recognition within the organization. The old saying, 'different strokes for different folks' is of course very true.  I am a believer that the big gap within most organizations is the presence of meaningful peer-to-peer recognition - recognition which has the same visibility as the corporate run program.  I don't believe that any corporate (top down) program will ever satisfy the recognition needs of the general employee population.  In most cases already busy managers are the ones expected (or required) to initiate recognition and the ratio of employee to manager is just too high.  Social Recognition provides visibility to many more of the contributions - and the people linked to those contributions - on a more frequent basis then formal recognition can ever hope to. It's a heck of a lot more cost effective too.

 

Craig,  my current thinking leads me to believe that peer recognition does ultimately place more of a focus on the "good enoughs"  since they are the largest group in the organization.  In addition to the recognition they receive, they are able to identify the behaviours of the high performers via the public forum created within the social recognition space. This gives the 'good enoughs' the benefit of many more mentor-quality stories to model their behaviour on day to day.  

 

The absence of the low performers names in the social space is a natural consequence of being a low performer, but, when recognition is frequent and public within the organization, low performers have many more opportunities to learn about the behaviours that make other high performers. I believe that this offers many more chances for low performers to learn and test new behaviours that can bring them up the bell curve.  Maybe their manager is not that great a coach, maybe the corporate program is not a good fit for them.  Remember the guy in high school who didn't fit in with with the system but found success outside of school.  Different strokes for different folks.  

 

Thanks again for your contribution - I hope we can continue this discussion!

[Anita Mountain]

Hi Steven

I couldn't agree more.  Peer recognition is so important and often over-looked.  However, some organizations need assistance to develop a positive stroking culture and this is where good leadership is important.

Further there is such a thing as the "stroke economy" and that relates to the number of positive strokes to negative strokes that a person is comfortable with.  Of course, as the person develops their stroke economy will change and they will change their stroking filter and let more in, which will help to build a positive sense of self-esteem and confidence.  Just giving the person who lacks confidence more and more positive strokes doesn't necessarily work as their "stroke filter" will bounce many of them off and/or they might go out to (subconsciously) sabotage a process to get the situation back as they know it.

Great to dialogue in this way.  This is the first posting I've made on this network and I hope it will be one of many.  If anyone is interested in taking a look at our website which has a blog based on TA then do take a look:  www.mountain-associates.co.uk 

All the best for a great day, Anita