BCA

Business Counsel Associates
Subscribe

Lack of Performance has a Price: Motivating Performance

August 08, 2011 By: azjogger Category: Management, Operations, Workforce

By Linda Finkle

Lack of performance has a price, and it’s probably more than you realize. Motivating performance of your employees isn’t just something to talk about; it’s essential for the success of your business. As leaders you recognize that lack of performance causes projects to be delayed and redos be common. Have you ever stopped and thought about the actual cost as a result of this? Cost overruns on projects are easy to recognize.

But what about other, less obvious costs related to lack of performance? If a project is delayed, the likelihood is that other projects are pushed farther out on the calendar. Employee morale is affected when projects aren’t completed or they are asked to redo some parts of it.

Morale can have a direct impact on performance, as well as turnover, and thus the cycle continues. Lack of performance is costly at many levels, and I’ve touched on just a couple. So how do we ensure we are motivating employee performance as much as possible? A few points I want to make.

1. I believe we have a greater chance of de-motivating employees than motivating them. There are numerous ways to de-motivate an employee, and frankly we do it without even recognizing we are. I’m certain many of you reading this post will disagree and site a variety of options to motivate employees.

2. In 20+ years as a recruiter, I found employees left their companies due to culture, challenges with management style, not clear career path, no ability to change/improve their skills, dissatisfaction about the work itself, and a host of other reasons that were “de-motivators.”

3. If we want to improve employee performance, we have to look at our company and recognize what is interfering with their performance. Consider things such as poor communication, ineffective leadership, a culture that punishes mistakes, limited opportunities for career progression, a culture where employees should be seen but not heard…you get the point. What are the parts of your organization that can negatively impact how employees feel about their role or the company in general?

Great companies don’t just happen. Superior employee performance isn’t just luck. Both are the result of leaders who consider their employees as true assets to the organization, not something that is easily replaced, like toner for your printer. These leaders invest in their people and understand the investment will yield rewards such as top performance, creative thinkers, minimal turnover, and a company where people are excited to come to work.

Lack of performance has a price, and it’s more than you might realize. Take the time to invest in your people, andmotivating performance will not be something you have to do; it will be something that happens naturally.

Linda Finkle, CEO of INCEDO GROUP, works with innovative leaders around the world who understand that business needs a new organizational growth style. These innovative leaders know that powerful cross-functional communication is the highest priority and the strongest strategy for building organizational effectiveness. To find out more, visit: http://www.IncedoGroup.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Linda_Finkle

Destroying Innovation- Part 3 of 3

January 17, 2010 By: azjogger Category: Management, Operations

By Mike Docherty, Venture 2

In my previous posts in this series, I highlighted examples of poorly integrated acquired innovation and some key success factors.  Here are some examples of “doing it right.”

Examples of companies that have successfully integrated innovation.

Great Harvest Bread:

In an NPR story, part of the station’s “Making Ends Meet” series that aired on October 23, I heard the story of Great Harvest Bakery, a franchise that encourages its franchisees throughout the U.S. to “do their own thing.” In other words, Franchise Central offers guidelines but truly allows frachisees to run their businesses as they see fit.

Often franchises are very conservative and strict when it comes to the leeway(or lack thereof) they give their franchisees in making business management, marketing and other decisions. The three sole requirements of this “freedom franchise”: 1) display the corporate logo, 2) bake the signature honey whole wheat bread and 3) grind fresh flour each day.

Focusing on a Seattle-based Great Harvest franchise, the story discusses the pastry innovation (e.g., “cini-minis”) and the general love the owner for what he has and what he offers. While not a typical example “integration” they have found a great balance between standardizing processes, while allowing individuality to continue to thrive.

P&G MDVIP 

I have previously discussed the interesting example of P&G acquiring MDVIP. It’s a very non-traditional example of acquiring new capabilities and brands. What’s also interesting now is to look back and discover that P&G , that behemoth of a company, that wrote the book on corporate “processes” has actually done an outstanding job of leaving a good thing alone. While P&G has direct involvement in the business (including some co-located P&G people), they’ve continued to allow MDVIP to operate somewhat independently, and have used the venture as a learning vehicle for expanding P&G’s ability to launch and grow service-based businesses, expecially in health care.

Printed with permission of Venture 2.