While employee recognition is one of the most important things you do, done wrong, employee recognition can go awry. I remember a CEO who stood up every year at the employee recognition event and recognized teams for their contributions. Picture this scenario.
The party was an annual tradition for half the day. Games like horseshoes, darts, poker, and cards were available to play. Lunch was catered in and it was a fine team building tradition in the company. Following lunch, employee recognition was the agenda. The team contribution of the year received a trophy and the CEO always talked about the team's efforts and results.
Then, every year, he named the members who participated on the team - and every year, he got them wrong. He named the employees he thought had participated, not the employees the team members would have named. And, his efforts to name the right people later were fine, but insufficient to the employees who had missed the limelight of the annual luncheon.
We finally talked him into just telling the team to take the stage. Later, we talked him out of an annual trophy and instead, every team that met the established criteria was rewarded. So, progress happened, with his employee recognition, but not before a few years of hard feelings.
In employee recognition, the most important interaction occurs when the recognition is proffered. You can, as a supervisor, make their day or break their day. The power of positive employee recognition cannot be overemphasized. Nor can the importance of providing employee recognition effectively.
Image Copyright Tatiana Popova
More About Recognition
- Eliminate Employee of the Month Designations
- Recognition or Entitlement?
- Reward, Recognition, Award, and Thank You Ideas
- How to Write an Employee Recognition Letter (Samples)
Connect with Susan: Free Newsletter | HR Forum | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+ | @AboutHR on Twitter
Hi
This is my first comment on this blog and forum, having only just recently joined. Congratulations on the fullness of your range and its depth. More importantly, this entry is exactly the kind of reason why I’m excited to join. You avoid the trap of taking the “human” out of Human Resources, understanding that there is a fine balance between control and fulfilment and, in fact, the two go hand in hand to everyone’s benefit. In terms of recognition, we go as far in our own corporate culture research as driving everything off a recurring cycle of Community, Contribution & Recogntion, with the “recognition” being the kickstart for the productive cycle to come right round again. It’s simple – but it’s one of those simple, natural things that can squeezed out by overly pretentious management science.
We look forward to getting involved here. Malcolm.
Thank you for joining in and for introducing yourself. You are most welcome. We are all humans and that is not going to change. And, philosophically, I am as much of an employee advocate as an employer’s. So, I try very hard to keep a balance on the site, even though much is written here from the employer’s perspective.
Brilliant, Susan, and unfortunately too true. Employee recognition is a powerful, positive mechanism for uniting employees behind a common purpose to achieve a company’s strategic objectives — but only if done well and done right. The opportunities to “wreck recognition” are innumerable for those who assume “oh, it’s easy” and make rookie mistakes.
I’ve written about several of this wrecked recognition horror stories on my own blog, most centered around a complete lack of acknowledgment of employee effort ( http://bit.ly/g1o3Pk ) and the very humanity of the person his/herself (as in your example of getting a name wrong http://bit.ly/enxYpk ).
I’ve also written on it on Compensation Cafe ( http://bit.ly/cEdrl5 ), sharing stories where the reward (forced dancing) actually encouraged employees to LOWER performance or in another case (an iPod given to a deaf employee) encouraging a highly valued employee to leave the company.
It’s far better, as you suggest, to honor the PEOPLE and their achievements, and let them choose the most personally meaningful reward and method of acknowledgment.
Brilliant, Susan, and unfortunately too true. Employee recognition is a powerful, positive mechanism for uniting employees behind a common purpose to achieve a company’s strategic objectives — but only if done well and done right. The opportunities to “wreck recognition” are innumerable for those who assume “oh, it’s easy” and make rookie mistakes.
I’ve written about several of this wrecked recognition horror stories on my own blog, most centered around a complete lack of acknowledgment of employee effort and the very humanity of the person his/herself (as in your example of getting a name wrong).
I’ve also written on it on Compensation Cafe, sharing stories where the reward (forced dancing) actually encouraged employees to LOWER performance or in another case (an iPod given to a deaf employee) encouraging a highly valued employee to leave the company.
It’s far better, as you suggest, to honor the PEOPLE and their achievements, and let them choose the most personally meaningful reward and method of acknowledgment.
Susan,
How great that your CEO listened (eventually)!
When I first started asking employees about memorable recognition I was amazed at how many told me horror stories of recognition attempts they would never forget: senior managers giving high level recognition and getting the recipient’s name wrong, recognition for great work given to the team member who had bowed out at the project’s inaugural meeting, the manager who showed no respect for the team and then tried to buy their loyalty with a year end award, and the list goes on and on.
Getting it right really does go to the core meaning of recognition, doesn’t it? We need to be continuously asking, “Do we really see our employees and the value they bring to the organization?” and “Are we demonstrating that we see that value in everything we do?
So what is a litmus test for successful recognition? Ask yourself: Do our choices for whom to recognize match those that the recipients’ peers would choose? If not, we either haven’t looked closely enough at performance and contribution, or we haven’t communicated the accomplishments of our selections well enough.
Thank you, Cindy. He was an honest guy. He asked me a question one day, very quietly and privately, a sentiment that I believe almost every CEO I ever worked with feels inside, but Jim was candid enough to admit: Why do I have to change? It doesn’t seem fair; I am the CEO. Why can’t I just tell everyone else to change? Isn’t that great? But, change he did.
I am reinded of the article that you wrote for the site once upon a time: Make Their Day! Employee Recognition That Works. Thank you again.
Recognition can go too far, and oftentimes seemed forced. I have seen it used as a motivator for employees who could perform better. In those cases, peers almost seem resentful because it is a forced recognition used as a motivator. It just does not appear genuine when companies regularly post or announce those they recognize.
In addition, those who are not recognized may be the quiet employees who are steadfast in their work but do not catch the eye of others, especially those in upper level positions. The best recognition is when a manager is honest, appreciates his or her employees and tells them, one on one, how much he or she appreciates what they have done. Public accolades appear superficial and create animosity because coworkers may see the real employee and what they have actually accomplished. Is one person worth the praise (generally speaking) or should it be the others as well who have contributed or done the background work for the one being recognized or picked up the slack so the superstar could concentrate on a project?
No one person accomplishes on their own and, to single out one person in most cases, is not completely honest. Boosting morale is great. Doing so with public recognition centering on one employee, although sometimes a team, is not representative. Not to say that there are not superstars who deserve recognition, but they must truly be superstars!
For some time we have been growing cultures full of recognition. That should be saved for the truly outstanding where it is obvious to most that they have done something amazing. In addition, recognition as in Employee of the Month: Pretty soon they run out of worthy superstars and are left either letting someone have the title more than once or choosing an unworthy employee. It cannot be forced, needs to be genuine, come from a direct supervisor in a very appreciative way. Perhaps reminding supervisors to make sure they communicate their appreciation to their people?