BizConnectionsNow.com - The Community for Entrepreneurs & Investors

Another part in my multi-part series on employee relations.

One of the toughest things that a manager has to do is motivate his or her employees. It’s difficult, especially in lean economic times, to encourage employees to work their hardest when there is very little that you have to inspire them with. The traditional concept of “the carrot and the stick” no longer applies, as carrots are in remarkably short supply and the stick of having to potentially find work in such a dismal job market is so constant as to have either desensitized workers to the possibility or, more likely, simply allowed them to be beaten down, losing the will to strive. Instead of trying to work with the outdated concept of offering reward while threatening punishment, try finding new ways to motivate your people.

The first thing you can do is give your employees a sense of autonomy. Everybody wants to feel as if they have control over their own lives, their own futures. Part of the problem with lackluster performance is a sense of no longer having any choice in their future. Again, the constant threat of being out of a job leaves employees with a sense of being at the whims of outside forces, and giving your employees a measure of control back will create a haven from that feeling at work. Let them have control over their hours, give them some control over what projects they can undertake, give clear instructions then let them deal with the work on their own, and don’t micromanage.

Next, give them specific goals to achieve. A worker who can accomplish a task, reach a goal, gains a sense of mastery over their own work. My giving them the opportunity to learn new skills and get better at them, they’ll continue to pursue learning and get better at things that they feel matter. Training programs, department exchanges, and inter-team competition are all things that can be used to foster a sense of mastery, to make employees find new, better ways to achieve the goals the company wants to meet.

Finally, give them a sense of purpose. It’s easy to get into a rut at a job where you feel that your actions show no tangible results. Why should a call center employee work harder to deal with more calls when their contribution is largely meaningless when considered with the hundreds of other people doing the exact same thing? It’s easy for employees to feel as if they have no impact on the company and therefore have no incentive to excel. Try opening the financial records of the company to employees so they can see what they contribute to. Offer bonuses throughout the company based on merit (this includes at the upper levels) rather than by contract or standard throughout the company. Make sure your employees know how well the company is doing, how they contributed to that, and how they can meet the new goals you set.

Motivation seems like it’s a tricky thing to deal with, but really it’s a matter of empowering your employees and bringing them into the company. Make them a part of what you’re doing, show them that you value and trust them, and that they are important parts of your business, not simply a means to an end. Treat your employees like intelligent human beings and they’ll work hard to meet your expectations.

I recently read a blog post written by Chris MacDonald at The Business Ethics Blog. I don’t always agree with everything Mr. MacDonald says, and this is no exception, but I feel that his arguments are based on a primarily false assumption in his post Exploitation at the Top that the executives that are being socially pressured to accept less compensation are somehow “owed” what they are getting in the first place.

Let’s examine for a second in what way these people are “owed” anything.  Not all executives were directly responsible for the actions that lead to the financial crash we’ve experienced, but still, we’re talking about “bonuses,” which are a reward for good work. Contractually obligated bonuses are no more than salary, so I don’t see why people should either receive extra money or have their salary raised for failing to succeed in their jobs. As a side note, I find it ironic and amusing that the same people who argued for the sanctity of contracts when it comes to executive bonuses also argued that union auto workers should have their salaries and benefits cut despite their contracts, but I digress.

Compensation divorced from achievement is pure insanity, and I fail to see how the legitimate anger of people who have been dealing with rising prices and falling service for years now qualifies as “exploiting the weakened position of executives.”

Honestly, it is not exploitation to demand that CEOs and upper level executives take less money for themselves that could be used by the company to lower prices, increase quality, or hire more people when the unemployment rate is so high. How many people’s yearly salaries can be paid if a CEO takes a $4 million bonus instead of $12 million? How many more people could be employed if John Thain didn’t spend $1.22 million redecorating his office while reducing his workforce.

The very idea of attributing any sort of social pressure to exploitation of upper level CEOs and execs is almost comical. I appreciate Mr. MacDonald’s originality and the implied idea that exploiting people who have made their substantial livings on exploiting others is still wrong, but the consumer wields precious little power over companies of a certain size, especially when there is no competition due to the tacit agreements of corporations to not lower prices, and expressing their anger publically is some of it. While I don’t condone more extreme actions like the death threats some corporate CEOs have received, I see no problem with public threats of boycotts or demonstrations.

The executives of corporations have been exploiting consumers for years now in a carnival-like atmosphere, consequence and regulation free, and it sank our country into economic disaster. Now that people are demanding that they do their job before getting paid for it, they feel that are being treated unfairly. Unfortunately, you can’t go on preying on those with less power than you forever. I suggest taking bonuses only when you actually achieve something, so you don’t have only downsizing and higher prices to point to when people want to know what you did to earn those multi-million dollar checks.

Small business owners have a lot to worry about these days. With all of the brouhaha over health care reform in the United States, it’s easy to believe that any plan will somehow negatively impact business, costing more money to employers by requiring them to provide health care at a certain level to their employees. However, I don’t think the situation is as dire as many would make it out to be.

Let’s ignore for a second that many businesses of all sizes are complaining that they might have to provide their employees with health care benefits that actually meet the needs of a person living in this country and focus instead on how health care reform can benefit business. I’m referring here to the Small Business CHOICE Act (H.R.  859 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-859) .

This is an important piece of legislation for small businesses since it provides for two major benefits. The first is that a 65% tax credit would be given to businesses who take advantage of the opportunities this bill would afford, making providing quality health insurance much more affordable and reasonable. The second is much more radical, however.

Several small businesses would be able to pool their resources into voluntary health cooperatives, giving themselves a larger pool of potential employees and, by extension, more negotiating power with insurance companies. This allows smaller businesses to compete with larger companies in terms of benefits and encourages insurance companies to take another look at smaller firms that they would otherwise dismiss as being not worth the effort.

It’s fairly clear from my previous blog posts that I support companies working together to improve how they deal with customers and employees. In this case, businesses are being paid to do exactly that.  Small firms could save over 34% per year if this bill were to go into effect, and there would be fewer uninsured Americas as a result.

It’s easy to panic when the government begins to pass laws regarding how businesses should be run, and it’s not their place to do so in most situations. However, it’s important to look at every piece of legislation individually and examine it for its merits. In this case, the Small Business CHOICE Act is a benefit to companies, encourages competition, and will ultimately save you money. It’s solid legislation and not worth the alarm.