by Derek Irvine
Recognize This! -- Differentiating recognition and rewards for top performers is critical while still allowing for all to participate in the opportunity to be recognized for work well done.
I intentionally stirred the compensation and recognition pot in my last post on Compensation Cafe. With a title like "An Argument for Unfair Pay," I'm sure you can imagine the post received several insightful and detailed comments. So, in my post yesterday on the Cafe, I took advantage of the very smart readers and fellow bloggers to showcase some of those comments and learnings.
Here's a taste of thoughts around the appropriate balance between paying and recognizing people fairly while allowing for the differentiation necessary for the top performers:
"Let them have access to high level management to discuss progress and to get help in removing any organizational barriers that are keeping them from solving the problem."
"The Pareto Principle still applies."
E. K. Torkornoo:
"Keep them away from terrible managers, narcissistic leaders and distracting politics (to the extent possible); assign them to teams with others they respect, listen carefully and respond to them.
"I refer you to an article in Personnel Psychology 2012 on "The Best and the Rest: Revisting the Norm of Normality of Individual Differences" by O'Boyle and Aguinis for an academic discussion of this subject."
"The notion that you can provide meaningful performance differentiation with a 2-3% budget is fanciful."
How do you differentiate for top performers?