How we reward people impacts and drives their behaviour? True? False?
At every level of society understanding what will motivate people to do the right thing in the right way is vital.
In Nations with a considerable taxpayer-funded society security welfare "net" - aligning State benefits to encourage the pursuit of employment for those who can and should work is a great example. Get it wrong - you create a welfare trap, get it right, you get an individual back and contributing to their community.
Within companies, the balance of salary and potential bonuses will undoubtedly impact on employees' motivation to perform. Salary, short term and long term incentives, when used wisely, can bring out the very best results and behaviours. When poorly governed, worst case, we get the Banking Crisis.
That is why some great teachings are helpful- Fisher and Ury 's "Getting to yes" set the benchmark for this, however this article in Wired really grabbed my eye - well worth a read and my key takeaways.
- It's not good enough to try and win the argument using data and logic, they manner you engage and the language you use will have a huge impact on the result you are seeking.
- Focusing on the right outcome is the key
This too applies to any client who has a business-critical, absolutely important role to fill. The strongest commercial advice I can give to any client having to hire under these circumstances are:
- What is the opportunity cost, financial, to your business of not filling this role?
- What is the personal cost to your career of not filling this role?
If the answer to both these questions is "significantly damaging" - make sure the commercial terms you negotiate with your recruitment partner:
- Put your critical hire at the front of their priorities,
- Motivates them to expedite your mandate brilliantly and urgently.
Our instinct is to try to alter people’s beliefs and actions by introducing data to prove that we are right and they are wrong. It often fails, because in the face of facts that clash with their prior beliefs, people tend to come up with counterarguments or turn away. Instead, find arguments that rely on common ground. For example, telling parents who refuse to vaccinate their children that science has shown that vaccines do not cause autism did not alter the parents’ behaviour. Instead, saying that vaccines would protect their children from deadly diseases was more effective – the argument did not contradict their prior beliefs and was compatible with the common goal of keeping children healthy.