Engagement Versus Motivation

Aus PrivateKrankenversicherung.wiki
Version vom 9. März 2017, 03:12 Uhr von LucienneEuler (Diskussion | Beiträge)

(Unterschied) ← Nächstältere Version | Aktuelle Version (Unterschied) | Nächstjüngere Version → (Unterschied)
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche

Some specialists advocate worker engagement, others are strong believers in motivational strategies. However one doesn't necessarily exclude the other. There can be circumstances the place even an engaged worker can use some extra motivation. Having an general engaged crew must be the primary aim of each leader. Engaged employees are a true asset for each group, especially in tough times. There is, nonetheless, fairly some confusion in regards to the distinction between engagement and motivation.

Engagement

Engagement comes from 'inside'. It's having perception within the 'cause'. Engaged people do what they do because they consider it's the proper factor to do and not essentially because there's a reward ready at the end. A first-rate instance of engagement is volunteer work. There is no such thing as a cost concerned, it takes up numerous time and it is vitally often ungrateful work. But most volunteers do it with passion and perseverance. Why? Because they believe in what they do. Engagement has all the things to do with commitment.

Motivation

Here is where the confusion starts. When we discuss motivation, we distinguish totally different kinds: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Intrinsic motivation is actually precisely the identical as engagement. It comes from 'within' and it has to do with the enjoyment or achievement a certain job or activity gives the individual, reasonably than the reward it can bring.

Extrinsic motivation is triggered by exterior factors. As soon as those factors don't exist anymore, the motivation can be gone as well.

The opponents against motivation strategies are towards extrinsic motivational measures like incentives and reward programs and they are absolutely right. Reward programs are counter productive; they often have a damaging return-on-investment in terms of money, worker satisfaction and retention.

What is there in opposition to Reward Programs?

Let me share my very own experience with you. I started my career as a sales rep for a company that sold copiers, faxes and printers. As typically the case, we got paid a fee on top of our - quite low - base salary. On high of that, the company had a number of 'reward programs' running. A program for the most sold models in a given period, a program for probably the most 'new business' and some more like these.

The worst one was the 'Sales Individual of the Month Award'. The one with the most gross sales in a particular month might hand in the keys to his firm automotive and was allowed to drive the company's Porsche Carrera the following month AND he obtained his personal development parking spot in entrance of the building.

What do these reward programs convey? Nothing, really. Guess who always gained these rewards? Correct, the people who have been all the time within the top already. Guess who did not even try to get considered one of these rewards? Correct again, the ones on the bottom. They okaynew up entrance that they would not stand a chance in opposition to the highest performers. And guess who tried a number of occasions however by no means bought the 'prize' and became de-motivated? Right, the folks within the middle.

So was it motivating? For positive it was, for the group who didn't need to be motivated; the top performers. They may have sold a bit more but as soon as you might be at the high, the room for improvement turns into smaller and smaller. It didn't do a thing for the underside performers. They were 'untouched' by these programs. It did do quite a bit for the group within the center though. That's the group where every sales manager can 'rating'. They have potential and quite a lot of room for improvement. And what did it do? Exactly the opposite of what the program was invented for. They knew that they contributed to the corporate and so they noticed that they'd never get 'rewarded' for his or her contribution. How motivating is that?

I hear some individuals say already:"Then they need to make it to the top! Then they will get the rewards as properly!" I can score a hundred and ten% of my target but if different people rating 115%, does that make me 'common'? No, it doesn't. Regardless of how nice your group of gross sales people is, there'll all the time be a number one and a number last. And reward programs will at all times reward the numbers one, the individuals who want it the least.