Comments on: Motivation for the 21st Century http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-21st-century/ Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:36:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Yuvarajah http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-21st-century/comment-page-1/#comment-75 Yuvarajah Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:12:17 +0000 http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-for-the-21st-century/#comment-75 I found the intellectual strength from Stephen Covey after he called the idiotic use of industrial age "carrot and stick" model of motivating people!. I am a retired soldier turned HR and find it an oxymoronic practice to use C&S approach when it works against the very fabric of teamwork, collaboration and interdependence. If we had done away with this Pavlov based animalistic theory, we would never have to deal with greed, mistrust, silos, elitist and a heap of other dysfunctional behaviours at the workplace. I am not saying that stars need not be recognised and rewarded. It should be anchored to long term career growth and development. Employees should be made to serve, honour and operate as a TEAM and sacrifices made in the best interest of the "family" where loyalty,camaradieship and esprit de corp means a whole more than a individualised vacation in the Bahamas. The reductionist thinking in linking money to motivation is the business world is probably the biggest paradox that has come into question, since the entry of Gen Y's. So, have we come to a conclusion who among the workers deserve the credit of being the key personnel - sales, production, R&D, Finance or HR?. I found the intellectual strength from Stephen Covey after he called the idiotic use of industrial age “carrot and stick” model of motivating people!. I am a retired soldier turned HR and find it an oxymoronic practice to use C&S approach when it works against the very fabric of teamwork, collaboration and interdependence.

If we had done away with this Pavlov based animalistic theory, we would never have to deal with greed, mistrust, silos, elitist and a heap of other dysfunctional behaviours at the workplace.

I am not saying that stars need not be recognised and rewarded. It should be anchored to long term career growth and development. Employees should be made to serve, honour and operate as a TEAM and sacrifices made in the best interest of the “family” where loyalty,camaradieship and esprit de corp means a whole more than a individualised vacation in the Bahamas.

The reductionist thinking in linking money to motivation is the business world is probably the biggest paradox that has come into question, since the entry of Gen Y’s.

So, have we come to a conclusion who among the workers deserve the credit of being the key personnel – sales, production, R&D, Finance or HR?.

]]> By: Neil Kevin http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-21st-century/comment-page-1/#comment-62 Neil Kevin Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:44:33 +0000 http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-for-the-21st-century/#comment-62 Hi,<br /> You are right about nowadays everyone uses carrot and stick method for the work.The innovation is gone from the mind of employers and employees.Your article is really helpful to me to get the actual business movements.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.vitabits.fr/supplements/" rel="nofollow">proteine</a> Hi,
You are right about nowadays everyone uses carrot and stick method for the work.The innovation is gone from the mind of employers and employees.Your article is really helpful to me to get the actual business movements.

proteine

]]> By: Eva http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-21st-century/comment-page-1/#comment-61 Eva Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:24:19 +0000 http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-for-the-21st-century/#comment-61 Ah, the details. A few companies have implemented ROWE, but that's not the best solution for every company or all industries. But that doesn't make those companies/industries undeserving of engagement, they just need to work to figure out a solution, piece-by-piece that -- as Paul mentions, requires A LOT of change -- and can be (much) more effective than processes in place now. Ah, the details. A few companies have implemented ROWE, but that's not the best solution for every company or all industries. But that doesn't make those companies/industries undeserving of engagement, they just need to work to figure out a solution, piece-by-piece that — as Paul mentions, requires A LOT of change — and can be (much) more effective than processes in place now.

]]> By: kare anderson http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-21st-century/comment-page-1/#comment-60 kare anderson Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:33:23 +0000 http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-for-the-21st-century/#comment-60 Not only untested but too general, The devil is in the details. As a fan of Dan Pink I'd love to see specific scenarios, company rules of engagement, and methods or specific behaviors that enable a company to provide those positive-sounding job opportunities. How to test? Worth trying yet requiring considerable more specificity Not only untested but too general, The devil is in the details. As a fan of Dan Pink I'd love to see specific scenarios, company rules of engagement, and methods or specific behaviors that enable a company to provide those positive-sounding job opportunities. How to test? Worth trying yet requiring considerable more specificity

]]> By: Eva http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-21st-century/comment-page-1/#comment-59 Eva Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:41:11 +0000 http://evarykr.com/2009/08/motivation-for-the-21st-century/#comment-59 Good points. <br /><br />I'd say the issue is more "untested" rather than "untestable" though -- it becomes a let's watch other companies do this first and then copy their methodology ("best practices").<br /><br />Change is difficult and risky. So it is much easier to either do what we have been doing -- until something comes up and we MUST change. <br /><br />I am thinking the key to bridging the gap between ANY mismatch science and practice is to make it easy, step-by-step, implementable in small chunks, and foolproof. Good points.

I'd say the issue is more "untested" rather than "untestable" though — it becomes a let's watch other companies do this first and then copy their methodology ("best practices").

Change is difficult and risky. So it is much easier to either do what we have been doing — until something comes up and we MUST change.

I am thinking the key to bridging the gap between ANY mismatch science and practice is to make it easy, step-by-step, implementable in small chunks, and foolproof.

]]>