Common Myths About Employee Motivation

Clearing Up Common Myths About Employee Motivation


The topic of motivating employees is extremely important to managers and supervisors. Despite the important of the topic, several myths persist -- especially among new managers and supervisors. Before looking at what management can do to support the motivation of employees, it's important first to clear up these common myths.

Myth 1 "I can motivate people"
Not really -- they have to motivate themselves. You can't motivate people anymore than you can empower them. Employees have to motivate and empower themselves. However, you can set up an environment where they best motivate and empower themselves. The key is knowing how to set up the environment for each of your employees.


Myth 2  "Money is a good motivator"

Not really. Certain things like money, a nice office and job security can help people from becoming less motivated, but they usually don't help people to become more motivated. A key goal is to understand the motivations of each of your employees.

Myth 3 "Fear is a damn good motivator"

Fear is a great motivator -- for a very short time. That's why a lot of yelling from the boss won't
seem to "light a spark under employees" for a very long time.

Myth 4 "I know what motivates me, so I know what motivates my employees"

Not really. Different people are motivated by different things. I may be greatly motivated by earning time away from my job to spend more time my family. You might be motivated much more by recognition of a job well done. People are not motivated by the same things. Again, a key goal is to understand what motivates each of your employees.

Myth 5 "Increased job satisfaction means increased job performance"

Research shows this isn't necessarily true at all. Increased job satisfaction does not necessarily mean increased job performance. If the goals of the organization are not aligned with the goals of employees, then employees aren't effectively working toward the mission of the organization.

Myth 6 "I can't comprehend employee motivation -- it's a science"

Not true. There are some very basic steps you can take that will go a long way toward supporting your employees to motivate themselves toward increased performance in their jobs.

First Be...Next Do ...Then Tell ..Lead by Example

Interview - Reviewing a liar

Tricky Tilt
Truthful people more likely to face her questioners head on. Liars, on the other hand, are "likely to lack frontal alignment and will often sit with both their arms and legs crossed as if frozen," says Joseph Buckley, president of John E. Reid & Associates, which has provided interview and interrogation training to more than 500,000 law enforcement agents to date.

Imprecise Pronouns
There is an "I" in "lie," but often not in the lie itself. To psychologically distance themselves from the lie, people often pepper their tales with second- and third-person pronouns like "you," "we," and "they.

Heavy Hands
When telling the truth, people often make hand gestures to the rhythm of their speech. Hands emphasize points or phrases--a natural and compelling technique when they actually believe the points they're making. The less certain will keep gesticulations in check.

Nervous Nellie
Skilled liars don't break a sweat; the rest of us get a little fidgety. Four possible giveaways: shifty eyes, higher vocal pitch, perspiration and heavier breathing. Be careful, though: Not everyone who doesn't meet your gaze is a liar. "Certain behavioral traits like averting eye contact could be cultural and not indicative of a liar," says Buckley.

The Reid Technique
A registered trademark of John E. Reid & Associates, the Reid Technique is a nine-step interrogation process that many U.S. law enforcement agencies employ to ferret out lies. The goal of the process is to lead the liar down a path such that he or she eventually has no choice but to admit guilt. For more on the technique, check out www.reid.com.

Curious Questions
Liars are more likely to ask that questions be repeated and preface pronouncements with, "to tell you the truth," and "to be perfectly honest," says Buckley. Evasive answers to direct questions should raise your hackles, too

Tongues as Long as Telephone Wires
Something about the phone seems to bring out the liar in us. In one week-long study of 30 college students, Hancock observed that the phone was the most popular weapon of choice, enabling 37% of the lies told in this time, versus 27% during face-to-face exchanges, 21% using Web-based messaging and just 14% via e-mail. Little surprise, perhaps: Most phone calls don't leave a record behind.

Sparse Specifics
Liars--amateur ones, anyway--may not have thought through all the particulars of their stories. If you suspect you're being lied to, gently probe for details. (You don't want the person to know you're on to him.)

Pregnant Pauses
When a person is lying, the gaps between their words often increase, according to a 2002 study led by Robin Lickley, professor of speech and language at Queen Margaret University in Edinburgh, Scotland. While honest folks have the truth locked and loaded, liars tend to take more time between points--no doubt searching for which approach will be the most convincing.

Faith and Reason.

COMING NEXT : " You Make a Difference " - A True story of college fresher..

.......Keep visiting .....waiting for views from all sides will be posting this after 14th August.....

The ethics of performance appraisal : Ask your self before asking others........

By to Axlie, Larry L. & Srikanthk

I need 100 things, but do I deserve to have all the things and contributing to them ....

The objective of the performance review is to develop the person, not to threaten self-esteem.

To abandon or abuse the performance appraisal process is a breach of business ethics. While some managers are skillful and genuine in reviewing an individuals performance, that does not appear to be typical. The ethical ramifications of performance review have caused managers and employees at all levels to become frustrated, cynical, and withdrawn.

* How do you want to grow ?

* Do you know what is your growth ?

* Compare and go down or Focus Target and Grow ...?

Most ethical questions arise from people relationships within the organization. Managers must realize that ethics is the process of deciding and acting. Recent survey results in one large organization indicate that only 26% of managers believe they are recognized and reinforced for their ethical decisions and behaviors. Employees have a big stake in the way managers evaluate and operate. Managers and nonsupervisory employees alike cite concern about "politics and lack of fair treatment, honesty, and truthfulness" in connection with the performance review.

Experience has clearly indicated that the handling of performance review sessions is usually far more critical than the decision made or information conveyed in the session. Frequently, when unsuccessful candidates for promotions are notified of the decision that someone else has been selected they are not told why. Often they are not told anything, usually because the managers or supervisors do not feel equipped or skillful enough to explain the reasons in a systematic and rational way.

Sometimes, major miscommunications occur in performance review sessions due to basic differences in ethical orientation. For example, the reviewer may say, "That report is a requirement, and we need to follow the rules of the organization." The person being reviewed may reply, "I make a significant contribution to this organization, and I don't have time to prepare reports that no one looks at. Judge me on what I accomplish." What is going on here? The reviewer is concerned with decisions and actions that conform to basic principles and rules (adherence). The employee appears to be oriented toward the outcome - the ends justify the means (results). They are talking on two different, nonconnecting planes. Unless the employee and the reviewer are successful in negotiating an ethical balance, each may view the other as taking unfair shots - and the battleground will be the performance review process.

The overall objective of high-ethics performance review should be to provide an honest assessment of performance and to mutually develop a plan to improve the individual's effectiveness. That requires telling people where they stand and being straight with them. It is important to keep the following points in mind:

* What are the primary objectives of the organization - i.e., what is the organization's purpose?

* What is valued most - adherence or results?

* How is this person expected to contribute to the organization?

* What is this person's position on the team?

* How well does he or she fill that position?

If you really want to know what concerns the individual, ask the following types of questions:

* What results do you expect from this performance review session?

* What is your biggest frustration?

* How do you feel about your department and the organization?

* What do you want to accomplish?

* How do you want to spend your time?

Many effective, high-ethics managers invite such input. They strive to help the person see how his or her contribution results in mutually beneficial outcomes. However, when performance review sessions are conducted, there is always the risk that the person being reviewed may conclude that he or she has no future with the organization and opt to leave. If this is an accurate perception, based upon an honest exchange of information, the timing of the separation could be painful, but the parting would probably be inevitable and in the best interests of both. There is a fundamental decision managers must make with respect to performance review, i.e., is the unstated outcome effective communication or minimum compliance?

Some managers and supervisors feel that being "legal" in a performance review is enough. If they comply with the rules and regulations and are careful about their documentation, they feel that they are secure and have a defensible position. However, being "legal" does not always equate to being "ethical." Simply stated, being legal is not enough. It is entirely possible to comply with the ritual and surface requirements of performance review without injecting the proper spirit into the process, which is to enable the individual to recognize and strive for performance improvement in specified areas. Clarity and mutuality of expectations are critical to success, personal satisfaction, and high performance. To achieve such an outcome requires that some managers and supervisors avoid the great cop-out of simply going through the motions.

A perfunctory performance review is an ethical strikeout - without taking a swing. If the person being reviewed feels ignored, his or her feelings of personal worth will suffer. In the worst scenario, low-ethics managers use the performance review process as a form of "forced humility" for individuals reporting to them. This is inherently wrong and will almost inevitably lead to the loss of the best people in the organization. Performance appraisal must be recognized and treated as an ethical issue of high payoff and peril. Far too often, the signal sent to the individual is one of three:

1. "We are only doing this review because we have to."

2. "You had better shape up or ship out."

3. "We want you to continue to work hard and develop new programs and processes - but advancement potential is limited."

The effect on self-esteem is the critical issue. A blow to the self-worth of an individual can be damaging to that person as well as to the overall morale of the organization. When low-ethics managers use retribution to coerce behavior, employees may respond out of fear. This would hardly be described as a trust-based and ethical business climate. If employees feel they have been neglected or not treated fairly, feelings of personal worth are often threatened. This may result in organizational strife in which individuals attempt to gain self-esteem or at least get even with those who have caused these very painful feelings and emotions.

When a performance review helps the individual recognize that his or her objectives are closely aligned with the organization's, the individual is more likely to perform at a higher level and the organization is less likely to lose a valuable employee. The objective of the performance review is to develop the person, not to threaten self-esteem. Treatment of people is the most fundamental ethical issue. Performance review is a matter of ethics.

Thanks to Axline, Larry L

Downsizing ....Think before taking a decision.

One day a woodcutter took his grandson into the forest for his first experience in selecting and cutting oak trees. These they would later sell to the boat builders.

As they walked along, the woodcutter explained that the purpose of each tree is contained in its natural shape: some are straight for planks, some have the proper curves for the ribs of a boat, and some are tall for masts. The woodcutter told his grandson that by paying attention to the details of each tree, and with experience in recognizing these characteristics, someday he too might become the woodcutter of the forest.

A little way into the forest, the grandson saw an old oak tree that had never been cut. The boy asked his grandfather if he could cut it down because it was useless for boat building - there were no straight limbs, the trunk was, short and gnarled, and the curves were going the wrong way. "We could cut it down for firewood," the grandson said. "At least then it will be of some use to us." The woodcutter replied that for now they should be about their work cutting the proper trees for the boat builders; maybe later they could return to the old oak tree.

After a few hours of cutting the huge trees, the grandson grew tired and asked if they could stop for a rest in some cool shade. The woodcutter took his grandson over to the old oak tree, where they rested against its trunk in the cool shade beneath its twisted limbs.

After they had rested a while, the woodcutter explained to his grandson the necessity of attentive awareness and recognition of everything in the forest and in the world. Some things are readily apparent, like the tall, straight trees; other things are less apparent, requiring closer attention, like recognition of the proper curves in the limbs. And some things might initially appear to have no purpose at all, like the gnarled old oak tree.

The woodcutter stated, "You must learn to pay careful attention every day so you can recognize and discover the purpose God has for everything in creation. For it is this old oak tree, which you so quickly deemed useless except for firewood, that now allows us to rest against its trunk amidst the coolness of its shade.

"Remember, grandson, not everything is as it first appears. Be patient, pay attention, recognize, and discover."