![\"\"](\"http:\/\/2.bp.blogspot.com\/-PD5Ij_QneDQ\/UoJb6KbTIKI\/AAAAAAAAAIo\/DYPZbyFuK-4\/s400\/v_men_women_and_children_working_as_tailors.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The reasons for employing people are:<\/p>\n
1) to do the work (produce output, product, service), and<\/p>\n
2) to improve the work.<\/p>\n
If the person is clear about the purpose of their work, then 1 and 2 should be easy to deliver if they have\u00a0the right resources, skills, and understanding of users’ (e.g. customers) needs.<\/p>\n
But managers rarely leave it at that…<\/p>\n
Traditionally, managers get people to do ‘better’ in their work by what John Seddon tags as ‘sweating the labour’ – getting the people to work harder or faster. The idea is that you get more output for the same hours work – essentially more for the cost (efficiency).<\/p>\n
Of course the idea of the sweatshop is morally uncomfortable – exploitation to achieve a profit motive. Yet we still stick to the idea by\u00a0setting targets<\/strong><\/em>: ‘You produced 100 widgets last month, let’s have you aim for 110 widgets this month<\/em>‘.<\/p>\n It seems plausible – motivational even! What possibly could be the harm in setting a target?<\/p>\n Well, the widgets are being created for a purpose – presumably the purpose for which the customer buys them. And that purpose is associated with the design and quality if production in the widget that is produced.<\/p>\n If you create arbitrary targets (and measures of performance) you will create a de facto<\/em> purpose in people’s mind which is to deliver those targets. This is different from actually delivering the purpose of the work.<\/p>\n Your worker will work to produce 110 widgets BUT\u00a0not necessarily a widget that meets the customer needs, nor a widget that could be produced faster or at lower cost whilst still meeting the customers needs, other than by cutting corners<\/em><\/span> (lowering quality or increasing risk). The worker is busy but has got his eye off the ball. This produces errors and lowers the quality of work – which will probably have to be redone – at greater cost.<\/p>\n Targets are not motivational. They might make people move, but that is not motivation<\/a>. A dog that moves is just one looking to avoid the next kick. It is not a motivated, free thinking, creative, proactive animal. Why would we exect people to operate any differently?<\/p>\n Reading<\/strong><\/p>\n Herzberg, F. (1968) \u201cOne more time: how do you motivate employees?\u201d, Harvard Business Review<\/em>, vol. 46, iss. 1, pp.\u00a053\u201362<\/p>\n Seddon, J. (2005) Freedom from Command and Control, Vanguard Press, Buckingham, UK.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The reasons for employing people are: 1) to do the work (produce output, product, service), and 2) to improve the work. If the person is clear about the purpose of their work, then 1 and 2 should be easy to deliver if they have\u00a0the right resources, skills, and understanding of users’ (e.g. customers) needs. But … Continue reading Targets only motivate people to meet the target (not to do good work)<\/span>