‘Incentives’ Articles

Oops!: The Biggest Mistakes Made By TV’s Top Bosses

From Mary Tyler Moore to Mad Men, the workplace has served as the setting for many of television’s most acclaimed and beloved series. It’s no wonder. The office provides the ultimate backdrop for observing human behavior in all its glory, moving us to laugh, cry, and, all too often, cringe and cover our eyes. 

In my latest book, OOPS! 13 Management Practices that Waste Time and Money (and what to do instead), I look at 13 time-honored management practices that actually reward bad habits and punish good behavior, often with devastating results.

With the new season of Mad Men about to premiere and the fall season on the horizon, I thought it would be both fun and revealing to look at how five of our favorite television bosses stack up against the 13 common management mistakes highlighted in Oops! 

Over the coming weeks, I’ll be adding to the list with other management mistakes from TV land and I invite you to share your own favorites. We’ll give away five copies of Oops! to the best suggestions we receive. Send your submissions to http://www.aubreydanielsblog.com/ask-aubrey/.

steve-carrell

Michael Scott (Steve Carrell) – The Office

Made OOPS Mistake #1 - Employee of the Month

What went wrong:

Michael created the Dundies, an annual awards show in which he presented awards to various members of the office based on their job performances.

While his goal was to motivate all employees to deliver superior performance, the Dundies, like other “employee of the month”-type programs, ended up angering or humiliating the majority of the office staff. The problem is that only one employee can earn the accolade while the others are left with performance that goes unrecognized – violating every known principle of effective positive reinforcement.

What to do instead:

Michael can make his efforts more effective by setting measurable criteria and rewarding and recognizing everyone who meets or exceeds the goals. In order to make recognition effective, Michael must create a culture of positive reinforcement that provides ongoing positive reinforcement for everyone who goes above and beyond their daily activities.

Liz Lemon

Liz Lemon (Tina Fey) – 30 Rock

Made OOPS Mistake #12 – Downsizing 

What went wrong:

When Liz must reduce staff by 10 percent, the entire staff tries to please her to avoid being laid off and Liz ultimately bases her decisions on irrelevant factors, such as firing a romantic rival. By indiscriminately firing employees, the remaining employees will likely wonder if they are next and develop a distrust of management. There will also now be more work for fewer people, potentially leading to lower office morale and productivity.

What to do instead:

Rather than allowing employees to try to sway her firing decision, Liz should have gotten all employees involved in a solution as a first step to avoiding a layoff, such as eliminating wasteful expenses or taking salary cuts or furlough days.

If layoffs must happen, Liz should treat those being terminated fairly and generously in order to demonstrate to those remaining that she cares for her employees. Most importantly, Liz must make sure that she increases positive reinforcement for those who remain as they take on additional work.

simoncowell

Simon Cowell / American Idol

Made OOPS! Rule #7 - “You did a good job, but…”

What went wrong:

While Cowell’s primary goal is to entertain, like all bosses he should also want inspire contestants to improve upon each of their performances. However, his critiques sometimes combine both positive and negative comments as in “Although it was good, I don’t see it as an American Idol-winning performance” or his critique of Idol winner Taylor Hicks: “You’re like every dad who’s ever got drunk at a wedding … got on stage and sang. The difference is, you can sing.” The effect of such statements is to cause people to ignore the positive comments and obsess on the negative comments. It is a prodding, nagging style of management that does not motivate and is more often a punisher.

What to do instead

Always separate complements from negative criticisms.  Give the good first and at a later time deliver the corrective feedback.  That way the good will be valued and the employee will be more responsive to the corrective feedback.

wilhemina-slater

Wilhemina Slater (Vanessa Williams) – Ugly Betty

Made OOPS! Rule #11 – Promoting People No One Likes

What went wrong:

There is a perception in leadership that managers who are well-liked are not effective at producing results.  It is understandable given that most managers believe that hard-nosed, negative practices are the most effective.  They are not.  Case in point: Wilhemina Slater.  Backstabbing, cruel, and vindictive, Slater may strike fear in her employees, but she is ultimately only able to hold onto her position through scheming rather than inspiring great work among her team. Bully bosses also create toxic workplaces. The only thing her two assistants seemed to have learned from Slater is how to scheme and backstab just like her.

What to do instead:

The first test in promoting someone to management is whether people would want to be around this person.  If the person does not have good social skills, look for someone else.  Look for those managers and leaders that get results the right way; those that understand behavior from a scientific perspective and can design systems, policies and procedures that bring out the best in people everyday.   These people are always well-liked.

ari-gold1

Ari Gold (Jeremy Piven) / Entourage

Made OOPS! Rule #2 – Stretch Goals 

What went wrong:

Like Slater, Hollywood agent Ari Gold is the epitome of the “bully boss,” crass, offensive, and constantly disparaging his assistant Lloyd. In this instance, however, Gold turns to a time-honored business practice – stretch goals – which ultimately backfires on him. When the career of Gold’s client, Vince Chase, is at an all-time low, Gold puts pressure on his staff to develop a presentation and strategy that will put Chase’s brand on par with Microsoft and McDonald’s. The presentation comes off as rushed, thoughtless, and unsympathetic, ultimately pushing Chase farther away.

What to do instead:

The problem with stretch goals is they are typically set too high and people fail to reach them 90% of the time.  With a 90% fail rate, efforts to reach these goals diminish over time and discretionary effort toward all goals is eventually extinguished. To get Chase’s career back on track, Gold should have set many mini-goals instead.  Managers need to ensure that positive reinforcement is delivered for the many small achievements along the way to reaching some final goal.

Repetition Compulsion at Citigroup

When I saw an article reported in the New York Times about Citigroup’s plan to increase employees’ base salaries by a much as 50% to offset the reduction in bonuses I was reminded of Sigmund Freud’s repetition compulsion. Wikipedia defines it as a “psychological phenomenon in which a person repeats a traumatic event or its circumstances over and over again. This includes reenacting the event or putting oneself in situations that have a high probability of the event occurring again.” This is exactly what Citi is doing. They are repeating the mistakes of the past, only this time they are actually making them worse. It is one thing to reduce or forego a bonus because of bad results; it is quite another to reduce a salary. To compound the error, they are planning to award millions in new stock options. While employees will take them and some will be grateful, they will do nothing to increase the long term viability of the organization. The consequences of stock options are way off in the future and very uncertain.

I have written more about this in my book, OOPs, but in a nutshell, I predict that increasing salaries to offset bonuses and offering stock options will accomplish none of the stated goals of Citi. They will not attract or retain the best talent. They will not improve productivity or customer service. They will put a burden on future earnings.

Now is the time for Citi to correct the sins of the past, not repeat them.

Don’t Be A Wasteful Executive

aubrey-on-abc-news-now

Enjoyable interview this morning with Jackie Hyland of ABC News Now’s Money Matters.

Take a look

 

 

 

 

 

Bonuses don’t work? It’s Elementary, Dear Watson

I read an article from the New Zealand Herald by Simon Caulkin (3.16.09) that caused me to alternate between depression and excitement. The title of the article is: Bonuses boost performance? Sorry, but it’s the very opposite.

My depression comes form the fact that it is just more evidence that people like Mr. Caulkin don’t have even an elementary understanding of behavior — how to get behavior and how to sustain it. The excitement is that because our business is about helping business people understand and apply the science of behavior to change the way the world works. His article tells me that there is a lot of business yet to be done. (more…)

AIG Is At It Again

AIG is in the news again. They are being beat over the head because someone has found that they have 374 bonus plans. While most people are upset seeing the word attached to AIG in any way, the fact that they have 374 bonus plans is not surprising in a company of around 100,000 employees. I would suggest that they should have more!

The issue is not the number of plans but the quality of the plans. In a bad economy, bonuses can be used very effectively to increase business. The problem I had with AIG bonuses when they were first discovered (See my blog – AIG Gives Bonuses a Bad Name) was that they were obviously not tied to the right business behaviors or results. When done right, bonuses are a very effective way of driving outstanding business success; when done incorrectly, as they usually are, they can be devastating.

Need we say more about the impact of bonuses…

Is it possible to have 374 different bonus and compensation plans?!  This recent article from Politico uncovers the half-truths and realities of how AIG compensated its employees (AIG Bonuses Four Times Higher),  like I said before in my original post  AIG Gives Bonuses A Bad Name, (March 13, 2009).

Thinking About Cutting Bonuses?

I wrote earlier on this blog about the fact that AIG gave the word “bonus” a bad name but the issue of bonuses keeps popping up. I have read lately in several business articles that some businesses are cutting or eliminating bonuses as a way to reduce expenses in a troubled economy. The answer to the question, “Can they cut my bonus?” is, “Yes, they can!” However, my question is, “Why would they want to?” (more…)

When Will They Ever Learn?

I was recently reading a paper on “grade inflation” published by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni.  It states that “In the face of acknowledged grade inflation, the Princeton University faculty limited the percentage of A’s a department could give: no more than 35% of students in any class can receive an A.” 

This kind of stuff drives me crazy!  Why is it that the symbol of academic excellence is in short supply in high schools and universities?  (more…)

AIG gives Bonuses a bad name

Everybody is talking about AIG again. The conversation is about how they continue to throw tax-payer money away. Over the weekend new details of AIG’s bonus plans were made public. In a nutshell the company plans to pay about $165 million in bonuses to executives in the same business unit that brought the company to the brink of collapse last year. The most frequent word used in the media to describe the feelings of the average American is outrage. (more…)

Monetary Incentives

Ask Aubrey:

Hi Aubrey !!

My name is Scott, I am a human performance technologist. My question is:

Bill Abernathy in his book Managing Without Supervising suggested that R+ systems without monetary incentives are less likely to be maintained by the clients.

Once you have trained managers in R+ and helped them with their feedback system, how often did a non-monetary R+ program fade after a period of time, and what did you learn to do to help sustain it on a global or structural level? (more…)