<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Beginnings of Mistrust</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.managementblog.org/archives/2008/08/27/beginnings-of-mistrust/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.managementblog.org/archives/2008/08/27/beginnings-of-mistrust/</link>
	<description>It's not a lesson in learning to be nice to people.  Management is about leverage and impact.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  7 Jan 2009 03:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Babs</title>
		<link>http://www.managementblog.org/archives/2008/08/27/beginnings-of-mistrust/#comment-23023</link>
		<dc:creator>Babs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.managementblog.org/?p=938#comment-23023</guid>
		<description>But why should the sales force reap the rewards of closing deals when the rest of the team is responsible for delivering those closings?  Maybe the sales team should be rewarding the rest of their colleagues for deliveries.  Wouldn't the sales team suffer financially if items weren't delivered or on time?  

I'm going to go back to the original post now: Contsruction defects being my topic.  This sounds like a quality control issue.  Do you have a team for that?  Perhaps you should relieve the managers of that task and let them focus on the rest of their tasks.  Create a job or couple of jobs for quality control.  Wouldn't you then eliminate the conflict of interest?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But why should the sales force reap the rewards of closing deals when the rest of the team is responsible for delivering those closings?  Maybe the sales team should be rewarding the rest of their colleagues for deliveries.  Wouldn't the sales team suffer financially if items weren't delivered or on time?  </p>
<p>I'm going to go back to the original post now: Contsruction defects being my topic.  This sounds like a quality control issue.  Do you have a team for that?  Perhaps you should relieve the managers of that task and let them focus on the rest of their tasks.  Create a job or couple of jobs for quality control.  Wouldn't you then eliminate the conflict of interest?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJ</title>
		<link>http://www.managementblog.org/archives/2008/08/27/beginnings-of-mistrust/#comment-22811</link>
		<dc:creator>AJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:51:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.managementblog.org/?p=938#comment-22811</guid>
		<description>Simply put – reward the group or entire company based on profitability on the project, job, month, quarter, or year. It’s not about “the one job” or “the one person” it’s all about the overall big picture. Reward the job or individuals with some public recognition.

The dreaded bonus system has always caused problems within our organization. Rewarding a single function in any dynamic operation is a fatal mistake. For example, quality and accuracy are in direct conflict with speed and timely deliveries. All things deemed important must be carefully considered when approaching an incentive for performance plan. 

Before jumping on the bandwagon of incentive pay, consider if there are any conflicts that may cause bigger problems than you already have. Remember that when you publically measure something and reward for it, other things may not get done since you have signaled their unimportance. This is a real life “Be Careful What You Wish For” situation. Don’t assume that just because incentive works for sales it will work for other aspects of your organization. 

The hard truth is that it’s all about teamwork, communication, critical conversations, culture, training and identifying what you stand for and what your core competencies are. My belief is that compensating certain individuals, other than the accepted sales force, erodes trust, teamwork, and culture in most companies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simply put – reward the group or entire company based on profitability on the project, job, month, quarter, or year. It’s not about “the one job” or “the one person” it’s all about the overall big picture. Reward the job or individuals with some public recognition.</p>
<p>The dreaded bonus system has always caused problems within our organization. Rewarding a single function in any dynamic operation is a fatal mistake. For example, quality and accuracy are in direct conflict with speed and timely deliveries. All things deemed important must be carefully considered when approaching an incentive for performance plan. </p>
<p>Before jumping on the bandwagon of incentive pay, consider if there are any conflicts that may cause bigger problems than you already have. Remember that when you publically measure something and reward for it, other things may not get done since you have signaled their unimportance. This is a real life “Be Careful What You Wish For” situation. Don’t assume that just because incentive works for sales it will work for other aspects of your organization. </p>
<p>The hard truth is that it’s all about teamwork, communication, critical conversations, culture, training and identifying what you stand for and what your core competencies are. My belief is that compensating certain individuals, other than the accepted sales force, erodes trust, teamwork, and culture in most companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
