Crowd-Scorched

Two facts emerge

anytime a research study
is done on recognition.


Two facts emerge


First -

it’s exceptionally important.


Two facts emerge


First -

it’s exceptionally important.

Second -

companies aren’t very
good at it.


These two facts define
what should be done about
recognition patterns
in a company and
what should not be done
with that information.


Over the past year, the HR
community has kicked
around ideas for incorporating
recognition statistics into
performance reviews as part of
the “big data,” “crowdsourcing,
”
or social media movements.


Over the past year, the HR
community has kicked
around ideas for incorporating
recognition statistics into
performance reviews as part of
the “big data,” “crowdsourcing,“
or social media movements.

It’s a powerfully
BAD idea.

“With the majority of big data
sources, you need to assume that
you are working with data that
is not clean,” warns the book
Big Data for Dummies.


One commentator cautioned
that turning recognition
into evaluation criteria
“can quickly devolve into a
popularity contest and as
your staff learns you are doing this,
it can be gamed, just like any politician:


One commentator cautioned
that turning recognition
into evaluation criteria
“can quickly devolve into a
popularity contest and as
your staff learns you are doing this,
it can be gamed, just like any politician:

‘Hey, I’ll give you kudos for
your thing if you give me
public props for mine.
We both win.’”

The biggest problem
with crowdsourcing
performance appraisals, however,
is that the practice can
lead to legal actions
against a company.


Crowdsourcing “makes labor lawyers
cringe,” reported Fortune
in October, 2013.
“The biggest problem with
crowdsourcing performance
appraisals,” the magazine warned,
“is that the practice can muddy
the legal waters if an employee
sues the company.”


The usefulness of the “crowdsourced
performance review” depends
entirely on recognition data being
a reliable proxy for performance
at the individual level.


The usefulness of the “crowdsourced
performance review” depends
entirely on recognition data being
a reliable proxy for performance
at the individual level.

In other words, an HR department,
and the company must be confident
that the recognition each person
receives corresponds to his or her
contribution to the firm.

Recognition is a crucial aspect in
creating employees’ commitment to
their organization and in
motivating high levels of performance.
It’s part of the unwritten social contract.


Recognition is a crucial aspect in
creating employees’ commitment to
their organization and in
motivating high levels of performance.
It’s part of the unwritten social contract.

Employees who feel well

recognized are more likely
to stay, to focus better on customers,
to be more productive and to
otherwise look out for the company.

The most effective recognition
is a social exchange rather than
a financial transaction.


The connection between
recognition and performance
is further muddied by the fact
that people differ dramatically
in their level of interaction with
colleagues, the frequency of
recognition they give and the
type and amount of recognition
they want to receive.


Many employees produce,
invent, spot hazards, please customers
and reduce waste
working in relative isolation.


and reduce waste
Should they be recognized
more often?


and reduce waste
Should they be recognized
more often? Of course!
But through no fault
of their own, they will not
show up as strongly on
the crowdsourced radar.

Companies, managers
and peers often fail to
recognize the best work
of the firm’s employees.


In the US, only
two-thirds of employees
are “confident that
if I do good work, it will
be recognized.”


Only 7 in 10 agree:
“My coworkers tell me
when I do a good job.”


16% say it with greater force:
“No one notices when
I do a good job.”


Given the importance of being
acknowledged for a job well
done, a company should be
constantly seeking to improve
the connection between
performance and recognition.


Employees themselves
have quite mixed feelings
about incorporating recognition
or the lack thereof
into their performance appraisals.


21% say they would be
uncomfortable having
their evaluations based on
recognition they do
or don’t receive from peers.


The percentage of those squeamish
about being “crowdsourced”
increases, understandably, among
the sizable proportions who say
their coworkers aren’t
very good at recognition or
who lack confidence that
if they do a good job
it will be recognized.


Crowd-Scorched

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Mehr von BI WORLDWIDE

Mehr von BI WORLDWIDE (7)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Crowd-Scorched