Motivation In Action: How Motivation Can Make Employees More Productive

Author: Anna Rodriguez

Not everything is about money. People have other sound reasons for going to work and doing their jobs than earning a pay-check. To name a few, there’s self-ffulfilment personal and career growth, social interaction, and satisfaction. Employers and managers know that employee satisfaction is crucial if you want to have productive team members.

There is high regard on the importance of productivity in the workplace. The easiest way to boost productivity seems to be through incentives. However, employers should be happy to know that there are other things that employees appreciate. These are sometimes even more than money: work conditions, well-being, positive recognition, personal growth, sense of purpose, etc. Employee satisfaction and perception has a direct impact on a company’s success and there are several studies to prove it. Here are ways to motivate your team members and make them productive without sacrificing their happiness and sense of self-fulfilment.

Never use fear

There is a whole world of difference between being respected and being feared. Strive for respect. A good manager doesn't motivate his team members to be productive by yelling what needs to be done and instilling fear. Yes, maybe employees will be forced to finish their jobs but only for the wrong reasons.

Do what you say

An impressive leader is the one who does what he said he will do. If you say something that you don't intend to follow through, you lose credibility. Keep your team motivated by letting them know that they have a leader who honors his words and acts on his promises.

Show appreciation

Give credit where it is due. A study by online career site Glassdoor revealed that 80% of employees are motivated to work harder when their bosses show appreciation. This number is twice as high compared to those who work harder because they fear losing their job or their boss is demanding. Not only does appreciation keeps employees motivated but, it also makes employees stay longer in a company.

Don't slow them down

When you have to make a decision, do it as fast as you can, without of course sacrificing the quality of the decision. Growth and success largely depend on action and procrastinating will only slow the entire team down. Be decisive and influence your team to develop the same decision-making skills.

It's okay to show emotions

Showing emotions doesn't make a manager look weak. It only shows that you are human. Do not be a robot when talking or giving instructions to your team. It's okay to laugh, smile, and have fun. Managers should also be more personable and accessible. Employees will not only be more comfortable, they will also feel more confident about their suggestions and comments.

Give feedback

Give honest feedback regularly to let employees know where they stand. Be careful with the way you approach them, mind your tone and your words, never shame and avoid assigning blame. Keep in mind that employees react to negative comments by their bosses six times more strongly than positive ones according to one study by the University of Minnesota. 

Encourage personal growth

Personal and career growth are crucial to keep employees motivated. This is especially true with millennials who are expected to take over the workforce in just a few years. The work demands of millennials are not limited to a hefty paycheck but also to flexibility and continuous learning. The career opportunities that millennial must not miss in today’s competitive work environment are vast and diverse and they desire for growth and fulfilment every time.

Motivated employees can truly make all the difference. It is important for employers and managers to know what exactly does their team need, what their concerns are and what drives them to go further in order to make more productive team members. No two employees are the same and good leaders know how to deal with every kind of personality, insecurity, and ego. Be more personable in motivating your team and strike a balance between achieving company targets and keeping employees happy.

Sense of accountability
Accountability is what keeps everyone on their toes. Giving your team something to be accountable for makes them feel like they are invested in a company. If managers encourage team members to take responsibility, employees become more willing to navigate potential obstacles and they feel the importance of getting things done.
 
Rewards are important
Rewards and incentives put value on achievement. They energize progress by making employees realize that they have to earn it. If you are working with teams, having a team reward system is encouraged. This is a way to keep a team motivated on reinforcing "team goals." This is also a great way to demonstrate that teams win and lose together.
 
Surprise with treats
There are a lot of inexpensive ways to keep employees motivated and make your team more productive, happy, and engaged. One great idea is surprising them with lunches or snacks. One study showed that 46% of employees feel appreciated with unexpected treats from leaders or managers. Company-sponsored activities and events are also preferred by many.
 
Reiterate purpose 
Shared goals and common objectives keep a company on track. Always assure your team that all their hard work is contributing to the company's goals and purpose. Constantly reminding your employees why your company started out in the first place keeps them focused and on target.
 
You are no Big Brother
It is okay to stay plugged in with what's happening with your team but as a manager, you should also know how to trust that they are doing their jobs well. Among the tips on building on a team’s productivity is to resist the urge to constantly look over someone's shoulder all the time. Resist the urge to micromanage. Remember that freedom can unlock creativity and productivity.

Keep everyone involved
Encourage your team to get involved and stay in the loop. A team that feels they are a part of something bigger than themselves are inclined to find more meaning in their work. Employees are inspired and motivated when they are involved with the plans of the company, making them feel part of growth and success.
 
Responsibility to build
One way to add value to the work that teams do is by giving them responsibility and room to grow. Switch Communications CEO and Founder Craig Walker suggests that managers should not "overbuild" when building a team. Give them work to do and opportunities to push themselves more.
 
Keep them happy
An article from the Harvard Business Review stated that the level of happiness has profound impact in creativity and productivity of workers. When employees are unhappy, they don't show up consistently and produce less quality work as revealed in a recent well-being index. This also means losses for the company. Other than reward and benefits, employees need nourishing personal relationships in a social workplace and find meaning in the work that they do.

5 Priorities HR Can’t Ignore in 2015

by CEB HR

How employees get their work done has changed remarkably quickly; unsurprisingly HR needs to change too

Anyone who works in a global company doesn’t need to be told that their job has changed enormously in the past few years.

Even if their job title – and sometimes their job description – remains unscathed, the number of people they work with, the amount of information they use to make decisions, their day-to-day tasks, and the technology they use have all changed quicker than at any time in their careers.

The changing nature of work is one of five trends CEB’s research shows will shape global business in 2015. And, given the function’s role, this shift in how work is accomplished means a lot of change for HR professionals. Heads of HR and their teams should take five steps in particular to help their firm make the most of the new work environment.

Five Priorities for the HR Function

1. Attract and retain “enterprise contributors”: Data from surveys of HR and line managers show that the average company needs to improve employee performance by 27% just to hit the revenue and profitability targets set by senior managers. HR teams should look beyond conventional performance management based on improving individual performance and develop a cadre of “enterprise contributors”. These are employees who perform well individually and who accomplish tasks by working effectively with and through others.
   In fact, firms with enterprise contributors outperform their peers by 5% and 11% on year-over-year revenue and profit growth, respectively. This means that the average Fortune 500 organization can increase profit by $144 million and revenue by $924 million. HR should not make the mistake of thinking that most employees aren’t ready or willing to be enterprise contributors. They are, but they’re stymied by structure and culture of their firms. Instead of trying to motivate employees to be enterprise contributors, HR should help their firms reconcile four paradoxes at the heart of performance management.
2. Don’t make yourself appealing to all job candidates, just the good ones: The volume of people applying for jobs has risen by 33% in the past three years but the quality of applicants has not improved at all. In response, many firms launched employment branding campaigns to establish their company as “a great place to work,” and attract higher quality candidates.
   But this strategy – called “branding for appeal” – produces pools of applicants of whom only 28% could be classed as high quality. This is because firms just add yet more to the mass of accessible corporate information. And all these conflicting messages – some of which are false – means that 61% of applicants say they are more skeptical of what employers say about themselves than they were three years ago.
   Instead, HR teams should take a “branding for influence” approach to attract the best candidates. Instead of releasing a(nother) YouTube video full of smiling faces and an uplifting theme tune, savvy firms spend time and money on messages that are relevant to the most important talent segments, and that challenge applicants’ thinking rather than highlight anything good about the company. Those firms that brand for influence almost double the proportion of the applicant pool that can be classed as high quality.
3. Teach employees how to learn, not just what to learn: Given all of the above, firms must keep improving their learning and development activities. Most employees are now well aware that constant development is essential and think that the learning and development provided at their firm is sufficient: 84% say their “L&D solutions” are satisfying.
   But despite this, and the estimated $145 billion spent annually on training, fewer than half those investments result in tangible returns. In response to these poor figures, many firms provide more opportunities for development, across more channels, and advocate that employees take responsibility for their development. But it doesn’t work. Nearly three in four line managers report employees with high learning participation lack the right skills, and the extra learning activity creates a lot of waste. Every day, employees waste approximately 11% of their time on unproductive learning.
   Leading firms increase employee awareness of how to learn (not just what to learn) and use learning technology that help employees develop learning behaviors, and not just consume content. This approach doubles the number of employees with high learning capabilities, and makes it more likely that employees will be equipped for the new work environment.
4. Make the HR team more valuable: Even though most senior executives are keen to stress how important their “people are to the business,” HR teams still struggle to provide the necessary support. Less than one-fifth of line managers rate HR as an effective partner.
   Many heads of HR have invested heavily in developing their HR teams to improve this sad statistic but most over invest in improving individuals and don’t do enough to change the organizational culture in which their teams must work. In particular, there are four organizational barriers that prevent HR business partners – those that support the line – from doing their jobs effectively. Remove these and firms can nearly double the number of effective HR business partners they employ.
5. Don’t mistake high-performing employees for high-potential employees: CEB data show that firms with stronger leaders enjoy twice the revenue and twice the profit growth. Yet a high-potential employee (HiPo) program, which is many firms’ main investment to develop their future leaders, is statistically more likely to fail than succeed. Data show that 50% of HR managers lack confidence in their programs, and a staggering five in six HR managers are dissatisfied with the results.
   Despite evidence to the contrary, many firms still wrongly assume that a high performer is also a HiPo. In fact, only one-in-seven high performers are HiPos. The reason mistakes are so often made is that there is rarely an objective selection process in place; decisions are rarely backed by any science. Those involved in the HiPo selection process should assess employees based on their ability, aspiration, and engagement with the firm.

Will Human Resource Development Survive?

by Darren C. Short, John W. Bing, and Marijke Thamm Kehrhahn

We, the authors, experience human resource development (HRD) as a paradox. This is a time when HRD appears to be at its strongest in terms of publications and research outputs and when the environment appears right for HRD to demonstrate clear value-added to key stakeholders. However, in other ways, HRD appears inner directed and without substantial impact: publications seem to preach to the converted; HRD research and, to some degree, practice appear divorced from real-time problems in organizations; HRD professionals see their work being completed by those from other professions; there is limited evidence that HRD has really moved far from the fad-ridden gutters of false short-term training panaceas; and practitioners are still measuring training person-hours rather than the relationship between learning and productivity.

Every year, the members of the ASTD Research-to-Practice Committee are given an opportunity to write an editorial for HRDQ. Two years ago, Dilworth (2001) described the committee’s work in exploring the future of HRD. Last year, Short, Brandenburg, May, and Bierema (2002) summarized the main trends identified by that work, focusing on the implications for HRD of the increasing pressure for organizations to deliver shareholder value, the trend toward globalization, and the need for just-in-time products, services, and solutions. Since then the work has been extended and prepared for publication in a forthcoming issue of Advances in Developing Human Resources.

From this body of work a number of major challenges have emerged. These are macro issues that address the question: What challenges must the HRD profession overcome to ensure the effectiveness and success of the field in the coming years? Here, we set out challenges to provoke thought and action. Our intention is to encourage HRD’s multiple stakeholders to join in a spirited discussion on the future of HRD.

Challenge 1: Responding to Multiple Stakeholders

The ongoing critical debate about whether corporations have a responsibility to a wider group of stakeholders beyond their focus on shareholders continues to capture attention (May & Kahnweiler, 2002). HRD practitioners are caught up in the shareholder-stakeholder debate, in part because they are responsible for the learning supply chain that supports organizations. HRD cannot blindly focus on shareholder value alone if it must also respond to learning supply chain stakeholders, including primary, secondary, postsecondary, and postgraduate education institutions; continuing education, training, and development entities; just-in-time knowledge delivery systems; and other learning solutions both inside and outside corporations. As companies proceed from manufacturing to "mentalfacturing," not to take a strong position in support of the interests of learning supply chain stakeholders is as reckless as it would be for a senior supply chain manager to disregard the various contributors to the manufacturing supply process.

The suggestion that HRD orient itself to multiple stakeholders implies that HRD professionals should promote corporate accountability beyond shareholders to communities and societies (Kaufman & Guerra, 2002). Perhaps HRD professionals will be able to educate the organization on the meaning of social responsibility and its relationship to corporate performance, while demonstrating effective strategies for addressing multiple needs and negotiating various stakeholder interests. No doubt, there is risk in taking a bold position in favor of stakeholder interests, but the risk is greater in doing nothing.

Challenge 2: Measuring HRD Impact and Utility

To establish themselves as key players in the development of organizational strategy, HRD practitioners must demonstrate how what they do correlates with the productivity and welfare of the company (Russ-Eft & Preskill, 2001; Swanson & Holton, 1999). The future of HRD depends to a great degree on the extent to which the value it brings can be confidently measured. We believe that a focus on demonstrating impact and utility will not only lead to greater overall influence of HRD on the organization but will strengthen HRD’s reputation as a legitimate profession. Therefore, over the next decade, linking learning and human process to performance and measuring learning, human process, and the resulting change in performance are crucial challenges to the field. Well-designed studies linking learning to productivity will be critical to these efforts.

HRD professionals must become skilled systems thinkers who can design and conduct measurement and analysis across the organization and pinpoint the influences of HRD efforts on employee productivity and organizational performance, linking past research results to current practice. HRD professionals must have the skills to identify valid measures of learning and growth and develop meaningful and accurate interpretations, while being ever mindful of the myriad of intervening variables that can influence learning and performance curves in work settings (Preskill & Russ-Eft, 2003). Ethical engagement in measurement work will maintain integrity around the complexity of learning and performance processes and will protect against laying shortfalls on the backs of learners and those who facilitate their learning.

Challenge 3: Orienting Toward the Future

We are concerned about how little time HRD spends focused on the future. Its research and theories struggle to keep up with the present, let alone anticipate what may be needed in the coming months and years. The void is filled by the fads, which falsely offer panacea solutions and lead to the poor reputation of HRD in delivering real long-term outcome benefits. To put it another way, HRD contains some products that are "quick-fix, flavor-of-the-month, buzz-worded remnants of a slick sales job" (Leimbach, 1999, p. 1).

Yet practice desperately needs to benefit from research and theories that apply to leading-edge issues. The challenge to HRD researchers is to anticipate what research is needed and how it can contribute to HRD practice in one, two, or three years, and then to make it available in ways that maximize the likelihood that research findings influence practitioner behavior. The ability of our profession to be consistently ahead of the game will elevate the status of HRD as a key investment in the knowledge economy.

It is just as easy to be critical of HRD practitioners for failing to focus on the future. Many are running learning activities that are out-of-date relative to new business strategies and new knowledge about learning, and the same practitioners are often late to the table when it comes to discussions on the potential learning implications of likely business decisions. The challenge to HRD practitioners is to be strategically proactive rather than reactive.

Challenge 4: Focusing on Problems and Outcomes of HRD Practice

Organizations are arenas with real problems that cry out for solutions. Yet the field of HRD appears to get lost in exploring its own processes. A glance through published research shows a wide variety of research agendas in HRD, but how many of them are focused on solving real problems that matter to stakeholders outside HRD? Chermack and Lynham (2002) listed the top twenty symposia topics from past conferences of the Academy of Human Resource Development. Included in the list are such internal process issues as core directions in HRD, university HRD programs, and advancing the profession through journals. Absent from the list are the major trends identified by Short, Brandenburg, May, and Bierema (2002): the increasing pressure for organizations to deliver shareholder value, the trend toward globalization, and the need for just-in-time products, services, and solutions.

By focusing on outcome-level problems and determining the HRD contribution to the solution, HRD is forced to think systemically and deliver a major contribution. HRD authors need to cease writing for the converted and seek a significant contribution in the world of those who are yet to be converted and those who could be labeled as being unaware that HRD could have any role in finding the solution to their problems.

The challenge to practitioners is to move beyond a silo mentality in which solutions can be found only within HRD and to embrace a perspective that organizational problems are systemic and require systemic solutions. This requires that HRD practitioners work in problem-focused, solution-driven, multidiscipline teams within organizations.

Challenge 5: Achieving Professional Recognition

HRD is a relatively young field. Few outside HRD consider it a profession. Chalofsky (1998) argued that HRD had yet to reach the level of a mature profession because practice is based on guesswork and not on theories tested by research, practice is based on research and thinking that are at least ten years out of date, and practice is based on what the client wants rather than on what works.

As long as HRD is seen as fad driven and reactive and those who lack a sound understanding of core HRD theory and practice fill HRD jobs, then HRD will be viewed as secondary to other professions in organizations. Although it will mean painful effort, either further professional development of practitioners or the loss of existing people, HRD as a profession needs to take specific steps to increase its credibility in organizations and its recognition as a discrete field of research and practice.

Efforts to build professional recognition will require HRD to construct a sound theory base and apply those theories in practice. As Swanson (2001) stated, "HRD practice does not come close to what we know from sound theory" (p. 309). The efforts will also require a sound education for HRD professionals with accompanying professional recognition and continuing professional development, and ethical standards that are understood and applied by professionals and overseen by professional bodies. More important, as we promote awareness and recognition of HRD as a profession, we must keep our focus on values, ethics, the quality of practice, and a set of competencies through which both research and practice can be undertaken, and avoid investing energy in the building of bureaucratic processes of credentialing and standardization.

Conclusions

HRD is a relatively young field, and there are significant challenges to its future. Failing to acknowledge these challenges will increasingly marginalize HRD within organizations. The tasks seen as central to the HRD profession will be taken on by others who work in professions more focused on delivering and measuring outcomes, thinking and working systemically, with a sounder theoretical base, with clear standards and ethical codes, with stronger professional bodies and competent practitioners. HRD will be left on the sidelines: a gradually shrinking number of people who write for themselves, focus on internal process issues, and react ineffectively to demands long after they have been formulated.

We invite all those with a stake in the future of HRD to join together to grapple with the critical challenges that face our field, engage in deep mean-ingful dialogue about the challenges, and construct workable, effective, and immediate approaches to addressing the challenges to secure the future of HRD. Our goal is to banish complacency and to encourage dialogue. HRD’s human resources are impressive; they must now be focused.

References

Chalofsky, N. E. (1998). Professionalization comes from theory and research: The "why" instead of the "how-to." In R. Torraco (Ed.), Proceedings of the Academy of Human Resource Development. Baton Rouge, LA: Academy of Human Resource Development.

Chermack, T. J., & Lynham, S. A. (2002). Assessing institutional sources of scholarly productivity in Human Resource Development from 1995 to 2001.Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13 (3), 341–346.

Dilworth, R. L. (2001). Shaping HRD for the new millennium. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12 (2), 103–104.

Kaufman, R., & Guerra, I. (2002). A perspective adjustment to add value to external clients, including society.Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13 (1), 109–115.

Leimbach, M. (1999). Certification of HRD professionals, products and academic programs. In K. P. Kuchinke (Ed.), Proceedings of the Academy of Human Resource Development. Baton Rouge, LA: Academy of Human Resource Development.

May, G., & Kahnweiler, W. (2002, July). Shareholder value: Is there common ground? T+D, 56, 44–52.

Preskill, H., & Russ-Eft, D. (2003). A framework for reframing HRD evaluation, practice, and research. In A. M. Gilley, J. L. Callahan, & L. L. Bierema (Eds.), Critical issues in HRD: A new agenda for the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Press.

Russ-Eft, D., & Preskill, H. (2001). Evaluation in organizations: A systematic approach to enhancing learning, performance, and change. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Press.

Short, D. C., Brandenburg, D. C., May, G. L., & Bierema, L. L. (2002). HRD: A voice to integrate the demands of system changes, people, learning, and performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13 (3), 237–241.

Swanson, R. A. (2001). HRD and its underlying theory. Human Resource Development Interna-tional,4 (3), 299–312.

Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F., III. (1999). Results: How to assess performance, learning, and perceptions in organizations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

This Editorial originally appeared in the Fall 2003 Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14 (3), pp 239-243.