Communicating Your Vision

Communication is more than just the words you say or the memos you write. 

Remember, actions speak louder than words. 

Take every opportunity to communicate your vision in words and deeds.

 One of the best ways to communicate a vision is to sum it up in a simple catch phrase.

Post your slogan, catch phrase and mission statement in prominent locations.

When you send out emails, quote it in your email signature. 

Hold meetings occasionally or hand out “Visionary Awards” to people who exemplify your vision.

Above all else, lead by example.

The Carrot

The “carrot” as a theory takes its lead from horse-riding and dates back to the middle of the 20th century. 

The idea is that a cart driver would tie a carrot to a long stick and dangle it in front of the horse or donkey which was pulling his cart. As the donkey moved forward towards the carrot, he would pull the cart and driver forward, ensuring that the carrot always remained beyond his reach until such time as the driver slowed down and stopped, at which point – should he so desire – the driver could give the carrot to the horse as a reward for doing what it has been encouraged to do.

For an employer, this can perhaps be read in a number of ways. Looking at how the “carrot” theory works, it is quite easy to assume that the “carrots” offered to employees should be continually moved beyond their reach, and this assumes that the employee is as stubborn and witless as a donkey. 

This would be a rash assumption to make, and continually moving the point of reward away from the employee could be seen as a disincentive. Not delivering on a promise is always likely to annoy workers rather than stiffen their resolve to meet the new goals.

It could, however, also be argued that the carrot on the stick is something which should not just hang there within easy reach. The employee will need to keep testing themselves, but as long as they meet their challenges they will be rewarded at the end of their efforts. 

The important element of the theory is that if someone has the promise of a reward at the end of their work, they are likely to keep striving for it. If that reward is continually denied them even at the end of their work, however, do not be surprised if it ceases to work.

The Whip

In different cultures it is known by different names, but the second part of the “Carrot” theory is the Whip. 

There is a long history of terms and sayings attached to the idea of having an element of threat involved in motivating a group of employees, or anyone for that matter. “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, for example, is an old proverb meaning that if you never punish someone for transgressing, they will come to believe that they can transgress as and when they wish. 

In the old “Carrot” theory, the way it works is that if the employee tired of chasing after a carrot that never seems to get any closer, simply slows down, a quick smack with the whip will make it speed up again.

The theory of motivation by threat of punishment is one which needs to be handled very carefully indeed. Not only is it absolutely illegal in many places to physically discipline workers, but other forms of threat can have a detrimental effect on the workforce. An employer, team leader, or manager with a reputation for flying off the handle when things are not to their satisfaction may get results from some people, but this method can lead to a culture of fear within a company or department, and stifle performance in order to simply get the work done. 

It is left up to the person providing the motivation to decide to what extent and in what way they will use the “whip”. There can be initiatives which combine the carrot and the whip – for example, in a one-off situation over the course of a day or so, the person or people who have performed worst in the team can be required to buy coffees or any other small reward for those who have performed best.

 A “forfeit” system can also be applied, but it is dangerous to apply anything too humiliating in this situation. The limits of the system need to be clearly defined. If it is something so meaningless that it won’t be taken seriously, the whip ceases to be a motivation. If it is too stringent it becomes the whole focus and can infringe upon performance.

The Plant 

An element of objected-oriented motivation which, is essentially separate from the above, but not incompatible with them, is known as “Plant” theory. Take as your example a simple house plant. In order to ensure that a plant flourishes it is important to give it the best combination possible of different nourishing elements. Most plants will require sunlight, warmth, water, and food in order to grow in the way you would wish. By the same token, employees will be motivated by a combination of factors. 

The average employee will require motivation in many forms and because humans are not all the same it will be a matter of judgment to ensure that each employee gets the right amount of each factor. 

This can be something as simple as getting the balance of “carrot and whip” motivation right. It is important, in many managers’ eyes, to get the balance right between the arm around the shoulders and the boot up the backside. Making an employee feel valued and supported without letting them become coddled is important, as is ensuring that they know they have to perform without making them feel like they have a gun against their head.

Taking three of Herzberg’s essential elements of motivation as an example, some employees work best with the prospect of challenge in their work, while some will work better with the goal of recognition. Others, equally, will want simply to get through as much work as they can while doing the work to a high level of quality. It is important to take into account the differing “buttons” that need to be pressed in each staff member to ensure that they do their job as well as possible.

It is many people’s view that the team which will work best is the one that has a combination of people who work well under different motivations. This way, tasks within the team can be assigned in a balanced way and ensure the best performance from every individual, and consequently the best performance from the team. 

The “Plant” theory, as applied here, is about knowing which plant requires which type of nourishment in which measure. By getting the balance right you can ensure the best “greenhouse” arrangement.

As a business owner a strong vision does not lend itself to mediocrity.

A drive to excellence always seeks improvement. If you accept 95% efficiency as a vision or goal, the efficiency will inevitably slip to 90%. If that’s considered “good enough,” it will become hard to keep it above 85% and so on and so on. 
A vision is a goal that is strived to be achieved.

Goals must not be unrealistic or unattainable, or your followers will simply give up trying altogether, becoming dispirited and demoralized in the process. If 95% of people fail to meet a standard, then that standard is likely too high and must be reviewed and changed. 

The same goes if the bar is set so low where little or no effort is required to meet it. Based on your vision, set high goals that are attainable but with some degree of difficulty, and reward those who meet the goals. If a large number of followers are meeting the goal, raise the target a little.

If only a very few are meeting it, lower it somewhat, or ask yourself why? Investigate any potential bottlenecks that may be holding back progress and resolve them. Talk to your followers about possible solutions. The people who actually do the work are sometimes far more likely to be able to tell you why they are having difficulty accomplishing a task or goal than even their immediate supervisors or managers.

Article from the IIB Business Alert News Letter.

 Keith Tindall - Accredited Associate of the IIB 

Article Source note : CONFESSIONS OF AN UNMANAGER; by Debra Boggan and Anna VerSleeg

HAVING EMPLOYEES SPEND TIME doing different jobs offers a dual payoff; They learn new skills and find out more about how the whole organization operates. And they do so without losing any time at training sessions.
 
But mandating such job rotation probably won’t work because most people don’t learn as well when you force them to do something. 

For a better approach, consider this job rotation program used at a Nortel plant in North Carolina: Work teams’ post temporary-help positions for which any employee can apply.

The notices describe jobs, list their requirements and say how long the rotations will last. For example, the MIS department was falling behind one quarter. They posted a notice that they needed someone to fill in for a couple of weeks.The host team interviews candidates and chooses one. For the MIS job, the team selected Jennifer, who worked in production. She had taken some programming classes at night, so it was a chance for her to test her new skills. 

The “rotators” receive no change in salary and no one fills their regular position. So while Jennifer was gone, others in the production department compensated for her vacancy. Those who rotate jobs tell co-workers about their temporary assignment. When Jennifer returned to her production job, she described in detail what she had done—and learned— at MIS. 

Suggestion: Limit rotations to minimize schedule disruptions that too much job switching might cause.