You Could be Motivating the Worst to be the Worst

 

Look over your workforce. Find the happiest workers. Are they your best workers, the highest performers?

You might think they should be, but according to a new study, the happiest may be your low performers, so don’t be surprised. In fact, in 42% of companies it was the low performers who said they were the most engaged.

If you keep up with this blog, you’ll know that the topic of getting your workers engaged, that is so that they work hard and do extra discretionary effort to make your team successful, is a common theme. This study does certainly uncover a problem that must be resolved.

What is going on in that 42% of companies where the low performers reported being more engaged and enjoying their work than the middle or high performers?  Researchers found that this result was because the low performers were not held accountable for their performance. They did not even realize they were low performers! They reported their belief that everyone works to the same standards in their organization.

OK, that’s bad enough, but repercussions are worse. The coworkers have to work extra hours and tasks to get the work done. Note that the coworkers now busting their collective hump are the middle and high performers. They become more dissatisfied with the organization. In this topsy-turvy world of motivation, the workers you want to keep are being betrayed and looking to leave. Your project fails to meet its objectives.

How do you make sure you are living in this topsy-turvy world? How do you make sure project worker performance is not hobbled by this problem? You can’t expect to fix your organization’s motivation problem, but you can do something to help your project.

• Ensure there is a way for each individual worker to have a clear picture of the standards and expectations for their role. Don’t think job position descriptions will be enough here. Define project-specific role and responsibility descriptions.
• Work with those groups that do not have good role and responsibility descriptions to define these, perhaps with the help of an HR resource. You will want to make sure your project needs are met here, so you or your designee may have to participate.
• With the above foundation, evaluate the process(es) whereby each individual worker finds out how he or she is doing against those expectations. Annual reviews do not cut it in the project environment. You need a more continuous solution. Consider evaluating team performance in your project and let the teams take care of individuals.
• The key is to evaluate team performance based on expectations of schedule and quality connected with your project. Get positive and constructive feedback to the team in question often – even weekly - so that the teams can respond. If you see weaknesses in a certain individual’s performance, make that clear. Now you have provided team and individual information to support direct action. You even have justification to request replacement resources for your project.

Without this basic setup, your ability to take effective action is limited. You will complain, but the response will be more likely, “We know and we wish we could do something about it.”

Get the Leadership IQ PDF for this study.