Earlier today, I found this post interesting on news.com which I would like to share.
By: Will Sturgeon, November 22, 2006
While the welfare of the planet may not top their agenda, the vast majority of businesses are still shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to energy savings.
Eighty percent of businesses have never conducted an energy audit and only 29 percent of businesses are investing in energy-efficient PCs, according to research from Intel.
What's more, the majority of companies expect to see their energy bills rocket over the next three years as rates soar. Most companies--94 percent--are also aware that energy consumption from information technology is a major contributor to global warming.
So why the inertia when it comes to addressing these problems?
According to Daniel Fliescher, senior research analyst at IDC, cost is still a major barrier. "I think there is still a perception among CIOs that it costs money to go green," Fliescher said.
He also expressed doubts that many chief information officers also see a close enough correlation between their IT buying decisions and "the death of the planet."
However, he said a greater financial imperative--gained by understanding total cost of ownership issues, including energy consumption--is likely to get IT departments thinking about energy savings differently. That impetus must be injected at board level--from CFO or CEO--and should filter down through the company.
Catriona McAlister, a senior consultant at AEA Energy and Environment, said businesses need to ditch notions of paying a premium for green IT, adding: "There is absolutely no correlation between the cost of a PC and its energy efficiency."
But McAlister also is pragmatic about the fact that moves toward greater energy efficiency--and the resulting environmental benefits--will be motivated by a desire for cost savings rather than environmental concerns.
IDC's Fliescher said while there are a lot of public-relations benefits to green IT, it is still only a question of economics.
"There are a number of 'nice to haves' and we can all market around green issues, but it is the dollar which is really important," Fliescher said.
Gordon Graylish, head of Intel for Europe, Middle East and Africa, said his own commitment to the planet stretches at least as far as realizing that no planet would mean no more sales for Intel.
"I care about it because the world won't be a great market if it's all bubbling away and half is under water," Graylish said.
But he added that equipment manufacturers and businesses such as his own must find ways to make ecologically friendly buying decisions easier for consumers and businesses.
Ensuring PCs can go into hibernation and yet restart quickly again will be vital in weaning users off an overreliance upon stand-by where machines still use up to 96 percent of normal operating power, said Graylish. Similarly PCs must be able to activate if they are required for an automatic update, to their antivirus protection for example.
Manufacturers have already taken the greatest strides, said Graylish, and it is the user community who are now playing catch-up. "The carbon agenda has become incredibly important from an environmental point of view but also from a board point of view," he said.
"The industry is moving forward at a component level," Graylish added, "but individuals still aren't thinking about buying decisions or usage."
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Gartner's top 10 strategic technologies for 2008 & Middle East
Gartner analysts have highlighted the top 10 information and communications technologies and trends that will be strategic for most organizations during the coming year. This list is mainly a global list and is derived from international market demands and maturity levels. What I do like to analyse the first 5 strategies within using this post and result into what degree each of this strategies will be applied in Middle East region (mainly UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar).
Strategic trends include:
Strategic trends include:
- Green IT
The focus of Green IT that came to the forefront in 2007 will accelerate and expand in 2008. Consider potential regulations and have alternative plans for data center and capacity growth. Regulations are multiplying and have the potential to seriously constrain companies in building data centers, as the impact on power grids, carbon emissions from increased use and other environmental impacts are under scrutiny. Some companies are emphasizing their social responsibility behaviour, which might result in vendor preferences and policies that affect IT decisions. Scheduling decisions for workloads on servers will begin to consider power efficiency as a key placement attribute.
Due to aggressive growth going on in this region, companies IT departments are mostly focused to build up the initial infrastructure and maintain its day to day requirements. I have hardly had a chat with an IT manager about how to reduce power consumption or how to go Green!
I found an interesting website that provides basic server sizing and does calculate power consumption and the TCO over 3 years for data centres. visit: www.sizinglounge.com
One of my findings in this market was that the data centres do not have any more power to provide services to people. For example, Datafort @ DIC in Dubai is facing such trouble.
The main question is: How many of the running servers and systems are actually being used and what is the rate of infrastructure unnecessary excellence in this region? - Unified Communications
Today, 20 percent of the installed base with PBX has migrated to IP telephony, but more than 80 percent are already doing trials of some form. Gartner analysts expect the next three years to be the point at which the majority of companies implement this, the first major change in voice communications since the digital PBX and cellular phone changes in the 1970s and 1980s
Thanks to Microsoft Exchange 2007 for providing a foundation for Unified Communications. As we can see many Exchange 2007 deployments going on in this region it can be realized that UC will be one of those strategies Middle Eastern CIO's will be looking at during year 2008. - Business Process Modelling
Top-level process services must be defined jointly by a set of roles (which include enterprise architects, senior developers, process architects and/or process analysts). Some of those roles sit in a service oriented architecture centre of excellence, some in a process centre of excellence and some in both. The strategic imperative for 2008 is to bring these groups together. Gartner expects BPM suites to fill a critical role as a compliment to SOA development.
We did notice during year 2007 many organizations in the region started initiatives on BPM and EA with a motive to enable full potentials and in order to comply with governmental imposed regulations. - Metadata Management
Through 2010, organizations implementing both customer data integration and product integration and product information management will link these master data management initiatives as part of an overall enterprise information management (EIM) strategy. Metadata management is a critical part of a company’s information infrastructure. It enables optimization, abstraction and semantic reconciliation of metadata to support reuse, consistency, integrity and share ability. Metadata management also extends into SOA projects with service registries and application development repositories. Metadata also plays a role in operations management with CMDB initiatives.
As I mentioned it on ITP a few weeks ago, organizations have gradually developed islands of data and with economic boom happening in the region they have extreme challenges to cope with changes. Configuration Management DB implementations as the first steps have been seeing in the pioneer organizations and repositories have started to become linked in some sort of integration.
Vendors such as Oracle, Sun are more focused in positioning their identity management products as an integration practice.
In my point of view, it will take at least another two years for organizations in this region reach the maturity levels required for metadata management. - Virtualization 2.0
Virtualization technologies can improve IT resource utilization and increase the flexibility needed to adapt to changing requirements and workloads. However, by themselves, virtualization technologies are simply enablers that help broader improvements in infrastructure cost reduction, flexibility and resiliency. With the addition of automation technologies – with service-level, policy-based active management – resource efficiency can improve dramatically, flexibility can become automatic based on requirements, and services can be managed holistically, ensuring high levels of resiliency. Virtualization plus service-level, policy-based automation constitutes an RTI.
Due to wealthy economy, infrastructure cost reduction has not been a major concern for business managers in this region where the IT cost hardly compare to other business units costs such as marketing. For example, a real estate company in Dubai pays at most 200,000 AED on IT costs per year while their marketing budgets are more than 5 million AED! Or their office rent cost is at least 2 times the budget for IT. In a mid-sized real estate firm the IT budget can hardly reach 5% of overall budget.
Virtualization has become a point of interest mostly for technical people in this region where they benefit from flexibility and resiliency.
We will see more of virtualization during next years; but I am not sure if that will be happening during 2008. - Mashup & Composite Apps
By 2010, Web mashups will be the dominant model (80 percent) for the creation of composite enterprise applications. Mashup technologies will evolve significantly over the next five years, and application leaders must take this evolution into account when evaluating the impact of mashups and in formulating an enterprise mashup strategy. - Web Platform & WOA
Software as a service (SaaS) is becoming a viable option in more markets and companies must evaluate where service based delivery may provide value in 2008-2010. Meanwhile Web platforms are emerging which provide service-based access to infrastructure services, information, applications, and business processes through Web based “cloud computing” environments. Companies must also look beyond SaaS to examine how Web platforms will impact their business in 3-5 years. - Computing Fabric
A computing fabric is the evolution of server design beyond the interim stage, blade servers, that exists today. The next step in this progression is the introduction of technology to allow several blades to be merged operationally over the fabric, operating as a larger single system image that is the sum of the components from those blades. The fabric-based server of the future will treat memory, processors, and I/O cards as components in a pool, combining and recombining them into particular arrangements to suits the owner’s needs. For example a large server can be created by combining 32 processors and a number of memory modules from the pool, operating together over the fabric to appear to an operating system as a single fixed server. - Real World Web
The term “real world Web” is informal, referring to places where information from the Web is applied to the particular location, activity or context in the real world. It is intended to augment the reality that a user faces, not to replace it as in virtual worlds. It is used in real-time based on the real world situation, not prepared in advance for consumption at specific times or researched after the events have occurred. For example in navigation, a printed list of directions from the Web do not react to changes, but a GPS navigation unit provides real-time directions that react to events and movements; the latter case is akin to the real-world Web of augmented reality. Now is the time to seek out new applications, new revenue streams and improvements to business process that can come from augmenting the world at the right time, place or situation. - Social Software
Through 2010, the enterprise Web 2.0 product environment will experience considerable flux with continued product innovation and new entrants, including start-ups, large vendors and traditional collaboration vendors. Expect significant consolidation as competitors strive to deliver robust Web 2.0 offerings to the enterprise. Nevertheless social software technologies will increasingly be brought into the enterprise to augment traditional collaboration.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Why American Managers Might Have Trouble in Cross-Cultural Negotiations
I found this interesting while reading some materials ...
"Italians, Germans, and French don’t soften up executives with praise before they criticize. Americans do, and to many Europeans this seems manipulative. Israelis, accustomed to fast-paced meetings, have no patience for American small talk.
British executives often complain that their U.S. counterparts chatter too much. Indian executives are used to interrupting one another. When Americans listen without asking for clarification or posing questions, Indians can feel the Americans aren’t paying attention.
Americans often mix their business and personal lives. They think nothing, for instance, about asking a colleague a question like, “How was your weekend?” In many cultures such a question is seen as intrusive because business and private lives are totally compartmentalized."
Source: Adapted from L. Khosla, “You Say Tomato,” Forbes, May 21, 2001, p. 36.
"Italians, Germans, and French don’t soften up executives with praise before they criticize. Americans do, and to many Europeans this seems manipulative. Israelis, accustomed to fast-paced meetings, have no patience for American small talk.
British executives often complain that their U.S. counterparts chatter too much. Indian executives are used to interrupting one another. When Americans listen without asking for clarification or posing questions, Indians can feel the Americans aren’t paying attention.
Americans often mix their business and personal lives. They think nothing, for instance, about asking a colleague a question like, “How was your weekend?” In many cultures such a question is seen as intrusive because business and private lives are totally compartmentaliz
Source: Adapted from L. Khosla, “You Say Tomato,” Forbes, May 21, 2001, p. 36.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
IT Service management outsourcing
Today I was asked by a friend to recommend him a few companies that could offer support and assistance to them in order deploy new stuff from hardware servers (SUN and HP servers with Linux, Solaris10 and Windows) to software (CRM, VMware, Exchange, SQL, Banking Software, Oracle, SharePoint, …) and the phone system.
The IT service management outsourcing requires strong contract management and risk management and as I somehow had a feeling about their start-up financial institute and the regional IT habits, did come up with such response to him:
Due to the diversity in your required areas and systems, I believe achievement of a quality IT service management can not be done by full outsourcing.
I do know several companies that are focused on a certain products and do have competencies in those areas only and do not provide any other services. For example, a company focused on CRM (MS Dynamics) does provide only that product along with maybe sharepoint.
(Playing a role in all areas of today's IT industry will result into nothing but failure)
In terms of hardware, there are companies specializing in a set of products who do keep a stock in a warehouse and have proper delivery mechanisms. You procuring directly from distributors will reduce the hardware cost at least 20 - 30 % .
Hardware vendors such as SUN, HP or CISCO do provide technical support to their customers under variety of service levels.
My recommendation to you is to take care of your IT in-house and not outsource it. At the most you will need three or four resources that managing them will cost less rather than the risks involved with external companies where you don't have much control except a contract.
The IT service management outsourcing requires strong contract management and risk management and as I somehow had a feeling about their start-up financial institute and the regional IT habits, did come up with such response to him:
Due to the diversity in your required areas and systems, I believe achievement of a quality IT service management can not be done by full outsourcing.
I do know several companies that are focused on a certain products and do have competencies in those areas only and do not provide any other services. For example, a company focused on CRM (MS Dynamics) does provide only that product along with maybe sharepoint.
(Playing a role in all areas of today's IT industry will result into nothing but failure)
In terms of hardware, there are companies specializing in a set of products who do keep a stock in a warehouse and have proper delivery mechanisms. You procuring directly from distributors will reduce the hardware cost at least 20 - 30 % .
Hardware vendors such as SUN, HP or CISCO do provide technical support to their customers under variety of service levels.
My recommendation to you is to take care of your IT in-house and not outsource it. At the most you will need three or four resources that managing them will cost less rather than the risks involved with external companies where you don't have much control except a contract.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Business Motivation Model - Service Oreinted
This post summarizes my understanding of Reward Systems from an Individual and Team perspective and initiates the topic of Service Oriented Reward Systems for Service Oriented Enterprises.
Reward Systems are actually business rules and policies strategically defined by chief directors and maintained by managers within an organization with aim of creating attraction for individuals to join a team and keep them motivated while achieving team goals.
Business Motivation Model
In order to describe a reward system from different angles, we should take a look into business motivation model, emphasize its importance and cascading impacts it could initiate to human resource reward systems.
By looking at the above business motivation model we can easily see many similarities to what has been studied about reward systems. Yes! it is true that organizations do behave like humans or vice versa.
Let's serialize the above diagram in a paragraph for business itself and then for an individual.
Organization Units having a Vision will define a Strategy to achieve Goals by different Objectives according to Mission and under supervision based on Policies & Rules execute Processes with different Tactics while it continuously assesses Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats for Internal and External influencers to rectify Risks and create Reward.
It is obvious if an organization unit fails in reward creation it becomes “unmotivated organization” and its subordinates such as directors, managers, employees, customers and partners will not remain motivated under any circumstance unless the issue is resolved.
The same pattern can be applied and studied for individuals within an organization. Let's now modify the business motivation model into staff motivation model.
An Employee joins a firm based on Organization Vision matching to his/her Career Path and to participate in Goals achievement under defined Policies & Rules for execution of Processes where he/she can improve Strengths, eliminate Weaknesses, challenge Threats & benefit from Opportunities while Internal & External influencers impact his/her Risks to achieve Reward.
If any of the above highlighted keywords in the paragraph looses attention or is ignored, the result would be nothing rather than a motivating factor. Most probably negative.
Conclusion
In today's challenging markets and business scenarios it is important to implement a sustainable reward system based on performance metrics that easily adapts into organization based on honesty, integrity and commitment of employees and organization.
On the other hand the concept of Personalization comes into picture, where rewards for each and every particle within a healthy reward system should be personalized based on individual's past performance, needs, socio-cultural and individual characteristics.
At the end, I would like to suggest a model based on the above as a “service oriented reward system” where each and every individual becomes a service provider and each measurable task becomes a micro-service performing an overall service with tangible and intangible rewards that can be orchestrated with organization rules & policies.
Reward Systems are actually business rules and policies strategically defined by chief directors and maintained by managers within an organization with aim of creating attraction for individuals to join a team and keep them motivated while achieving team goals.
Business Motivation Model
In order to describe a reward system from different angles, we should take a look into business motivation model, emphasize its importance and cascading impacts it could initiate to human resource reward systems.
- Ends (Vision, Goal, Objective)
- Means (Mission, Strategy, Tactic)
- Guidance: Policies & Rules
- Influencer (Internal, External)
- Assessment (SWOT)
- Impact Value (Risk, Reward)
By looking at the above business motivation model we can easily see many similarities to what has been studied about reward systems. Yes! it is true that organizations do behave like humans or vice versa.
Let's serialize the above diagram in a paragraph for business itself and then for an individual.
Organization Units having a Vision will define a Strategy to achieve Goals by different Objectives according to Mission and under supervision based on Policies & Rules execute Processes with different Tactics while it continuously assesses Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats for Internal and External influencers to rectify Risks and create Reward.
It is obvious if an organization unit fails in reward creation it becomes “unmotivated organization” and its subordinates such as directors, managers, employees, customers and partners will not remain motivated under any circumstance unless the issue is resolved.
The same pattern can be applied and studied for individuals within an organization. Let's now modify the business motivation model into staff motivation model.
An Employee joins a firm based on Organization Vision matching to his/her Career Path and to participate in Goals achievement under defined Policies & Rules for execution of Processes where he/she can improve Strengths, eliminate Weaknesses, challenge Threats & benefit from Opportunities while Internal & External influencers impact his/her Risks to achieve Reward.
If any of the above highlighted keywords in the paragraph looses attention or is ignored, the result would be nothing rather than a motivating factor. Most probably negative.
Conclusion
In today's challenging markets and business scenarios it is important to implement a sustainable reward system based on performance metrics that easily adapts into organization based on honesty, integrity and commitment of employees and organization.
On the other hand the concept of Personalization comes into picture, where rewards for each and every particle within a healthy reward system should be personalized based on individual's past performance, needs, socio-cultural and individual characteristics.
At the end, I would like to suggest a model based on the above as a “service oriented reward system” where each and every individual becomes a service provider and each measurable task becomes a micro-service performing an overall service with tangible and intangible rewards that can be orchestrated with organization rules & policies.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Why Rewards?
While studying today, I remember one one my previous readings from a book called Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies by Jared Diamond.
The book is about civilizations. An explanation of possible reasons of why some societies did grow faster and some didn't.
Quote from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel
The prologue to the book opens with an account of Diamond's conversation with Yali, a New Guinean politician. The conversation turned to the obvious differences in power and technology between Yali's people and the Europeans who dominated the land for 200 years, differences that neither of them considered due to any genetic superiority of Europeans. Yali asked, using the local term "cargo" for inventions and manufactured goods, "Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?"
There is no clear answer given in the book, but you can answer the question by looking to the environmental force and demand. Where Europeans in order to be Physiological secured had to build strong houses. On the other side of the world where climate was not demanding strong houses, people could survive and live without thinking of building strong houses. The same goes for safety and other needs.
By looking at Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, I can realize how people's needs do format the society and by taking this concept to the organization we do see the same concept again.
Based on the above mentioned pattern, we can link several concepts captured from this unit and the forum posts to each other which they do impact the overall implementation of a successful organization reward system.
We do spend energy without expectation either because of self pleasure (inner-rewards) or as learned from ancestors (habit) like the monkeys did.
When a need is satisfied by our energy then we do expect reward.
Conceptually,
We wash our hands to reward health to ourselves.
We cook to reward food to ourselves.
We work to reward comfort to ourselves and enable growth.
"We do a certain task to satisfy a need and get respective reward out of it. "
Let's look at an organization where the top management is not motivated! Consecutively the administration will not be motivated and we can expect everything to become a mess in that organization.
The reward system is always expected from the top to down (management to employee) and (father to kid).
This shows the importance of a high pay to CEO's in organizations and it also answers the overall economic growth in countries like US where special attention is paid to management.
By taking a look at the equity theory and the continuous change of needs within an organization and external factors that impact equity, I do see a strong necessity for an "adaptive rewards system" based on a tailored framework for organizations where industry, organization size and regional culture along with current status are the main modifiers.
A reward system should spirally grow and mainly requires strong leadership skills.
The book is about civilizations. An explanation of possible reasons of why some societies did grow faster and some didn't.
Quote from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel
The prologue to the book opens with an account of Diamond's conversation with Yali, a New Guinean politician. The conversation turned to the obvious differences in power and technology between Yali's people and the Europeans who dominated the land for 200 years, differences that neither of them considered due to any genetic superiority of Europeans. Yali asked, using the local term "cargo" for inventions and manufactured goods, "Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?"
There is no clear answer given in the book, but you can answer the question by looking to the environmental force and demand. Where Europeans in order to be Physiological secured had to build strong houses. On the other side of the world where climate was not demanding strong houses, people could survive and live without thinking of building strong houses. The same goes for safety and other needs.
By looking at Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, I can realize how people's needs do format the society and by taking this concept to the organization we do see the same concept again.
Based on the above mentioned pattern, we can link several concepts captured from this unit and the forum posts to each other which they do impact the overall implementation of a successful organization reward system.
We do spend energy without expectation either because of self pleasure (inner-rewards) or as learned from ancestors (habit) like the monkeys did.
When a need is satisfied by our energy then we do expect reward.
Conceptually,
We wash our hands to reward health to ourselves.
We cook to reward food to ourselves.
We work to reward comfort to ourselves and enable growth.
"We do a certain task to satisfy a need and get respective reward out of it. "
Let's look at an organization where the top management is not motivated! Consecutively the administration will not be motivated and we can expect everything to become a mess in that organization.
The reward system is always expected from the top to down (management to employee) and (father to kid).
This shows the importance of a high pay to CEO's in organizations and it also answers the overall economic growth in countries like US where special attention is paid to management.
By taking a look at the equity theory and the continuous change of needs within an organization and external factors that impact equity, I do see a strong necessity for an "adaptive rewards system" based on a tailored framework for organizations where industry, organization size and regional culture along with current status are the main modifiers.
A reward system should spirally grow and mainly requires strong leadership skills.
Organizational Reward Systems
By reading the "ORGANIZATIONAL REWARD SYSTEMS" article we realize that we have faced the concepts in action or maybe implemented a few of them during our career paths.
We usually forget how we were motivated in early years of our work and by looking back we see different techniques and methodologies that had their own characteristics and respective impact.
By looking what my previous organizations did and faced; I believe, the best reward systems can not do magic by their own and they require micro attention and control. In general, to have a good understanding of a reward system we have to look at a broader range of activities rather than financial benefits.
For example: a team manager markets (exposes) his/her team achievements loudly within organization. Team members leave jealousy behaviours of theirs and focus on increasing team achievement. Most of the time small actions (like listening with care, taking into consideration, direct support) go inside reward system.
But in reality as soon as we talk about reward the first thing is "raise", or "bonus" which in my point of view is not the best option all times. And by knowing that measurement and constant evaluation based on analysed metrics are the main factors that enable managers to have justifiable judgement over performance, we do see in business somehow that decisions are not made based on them.
I had two questions in that regard as following which were answered by some of my classmates.
1. How can we keep a reward system healthy and mutually profitable for employee and organization?
Nicola Said: With both constant AND consistent monitoring and readdressing of results. Feedback exchange between employees and organization and if the results are not working for both, open discussion on what could be changed. I note "open" discussion because if employees are not involved and the goalposts are changed you will then have issues through changed 'Expectancy' (ie: Effort ->Performance->You Changed the Goal/Reward = I didn't get my expected outcome!).
If the organization however wishes to focus on only the results of the behaviour and ignore the employee expectations/attitude/feelings, and change the actions moving forward based on the results from those past actions then it will follow the Reinforcement Theory.
Jalal Said: First i think it's for the management to set a healthy and mutually profitable reward system.
Usually they look to the company profit first and than the employee comes which is logic.
I think by communication with upper management we can offer them our creative ideas.
2. What are the pros and cons of publicizing employee performance and rewards?
Nicola Said: The pro's could be through following employee recognition but as the assignment materials indicate this could result in employee cynicism. I also believe through too much publicising/hero pedastooling of employees you can end up unwittingly managing with a "divide and conquer" mentality. Publicising the actual rewards or rewards scheme might be a good idea as this can reinforce more publicly to the whole organization your intention as a company, show deliverability of the reward etc.
~Sina Ghazi
We usually forget how we were motivated in early years of our work and by looking back we see different techniques and methodologies that had their own characteristics and respective impact.
By looking what my previous organizations did and faced; I believe, the best reward systems can not do magic by their own and they require micro attention and control. In general, to have a good understanding of a reward system we have to look at a broader range of activities rather than financial benefits.
For example: a team manager markets (exposes) his/her team achievements loudly within organization. Team members leave jealousy behaviours of theirs and focus on increasing team achievement. Most of the time small actions (like listening with care, taking into consideration, direct support) go inside reward system.
But in reality as soon as we talk about reward the first thing is "raise", or "bonus" which in my point of view is not the best option all times. And by knowing that measurement and constant evaluation based on analysed metrics are the main factors that enable managers to have justifiable judgement over performance, we do see in business somehow that decisions are not made based on them.
I had two questions in that regard as following which were answered by some of my classmates.
1. How can we keep a reward system healthy and mutually profitable for employee and organization?
Nicola Said: With both constant AND consistent monitoring and readdressing of results. Feedback exchange between employees and organization and if the results are not working for both, open discussion on what could be changed. I note "open" discussion because if employees are not involved and the goalposts are changed you will then have issues through changed 'Expectancy' (ie: Effort ->Performance->You Changed the Goal/Reward = I didn't get my expected outcome!).
If the organization however wishes to focus on only the results of the behaviour and ignore the employee expectations/attitude/feelings, and change the actions moving forward based on the results from those past actions then it will follow the Reinforcement Theory.
Jalal Said: First i think it's for the management to set a healthy and mutually profitable reward system.
Usually they look to the company profit first and than the employee comes which is logic.
I think by communication with upper management we can offer them our creative ideas.
2. What are the pros and cons of publicizing employee performance and rewards?
Nicola Said: The pro's could be through following employee recognition but as the assignment materials indicate this could result in employee cynicism. I also believe through too much publicising/hero pedastooling of employees you can end up unwittingly managing with a "divide and conquer" mentality. Publicising the actual rewards or rewards scheme might be a good idea as this can reinforce more publicly to the whole organization your intention as a company, show deliverability of the reward etc.
~Sina Ghazi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)