How far can an incentive program go in driving the efforts and behaviors necessary for improvement and innovation, when the organization itself has placed large rocks in the way?
Paul Hebert has written great posts on motivating people to be innovative (see here and here). One of Paul's key points - and I agree - is the importance of creating an environment in which innovation can take hold. And it is here where organizations often become their own worst enemy, whether in regard to motivating innovation or just driving improvements in performance. Paul nicely sums up the dilemma of trying to create the conditions for motivation under these circumstances:
My concern - from a motivation standpoint - am I pushing the proverbial rock up the hill to create incentive and recognition programs to drive innovation when the organization that the program resides within is designed to thwart my efforts? Or can my recommendations actually help a company break some of the boundaries the hierarchy imposes - creating an overlay structure that drives innovation?
I encounter this problem often in organizations that are seeking to implement an incentive plan to address an improvement need. My initial assessment of the situation (I always start by asking a lot of questions) often results in conversation that go like this:
* * * * * * * * * *
Scene 1: Initial interview with top management
Me: So tell me exactly what you are looking to accomplish with an incentive plan for your patient service providers (PSPs)?
Top Management: We need to improve their productivity, which we measure as the ratio of patient hours to total hours worked. Our reimbursement levels, and ultimately our financial viability, depend on improving this. Our success rides on incenting these employee to be more productive with their time.
Fast forward to Scene 2: Conversations with PSPs
Me: What prevents you from being as productive as possible, from seeing more patients during the course of an average day?
PSPs: We always strive to fill our schedules to the degree possible. We understand that this is important. The biggest obstacle we face is Scheduling. They book all our patient appointments, but they leave holes in our schedules and we can't get them to fill these holes. And if a patient cancels, we often get on the phone to Scheduling to see if we can fit someone else into that empty hour, but it is difficult to get them to act.
Me: Schedulers? Are they part of the Patient Service Division?
PSPs: No, they report into the Central Administration Division.
Fast forward to Scene 3: Conversations with Schedulers
Me: Tell me how you work with the PSPs in scheduling their patients.
Schedulers: PSPs are always after us to squeeze in more patients, even at times that are not the most convenient. We strive for happy and satisfied patients, and try to always give them their first choice of appointment times, no matter what. Just because a PSP wants to fill an opening in their schedule, that doesn't mean that it is a convenient time for the patient to come...
* * * * * * * * * *
And this is just the beginning, but you probably get the drift. Without deeply understanding the nature of the performance problem, along with the structural impediments and competing objectives that underlie it, it would be pointless - and perhaps counterproductive - to simply plop in an incentive plan. The best value that an HR or reward professional can contribute under these circumstances, I believe, is to clearly define the obstacles and help define a plan for creating the conditions under which improvement or innovation is more likely to occur. And then - and probably only then - introduce a reward plan that helps focus employees on the the efforts and behaviors most likely to produce success.
Comments