It's that time again. Most "well-managed" organizations have collected the information they need to appraise the 2010 performance of their employees and either have given -- or are about to give -- the results to them.
In most cases, the companies I have studied measure only the performance of their employees with respect to their impact on the business' bottom-line: financial performance. Well-managed companies measure both the results achieved and "how" they achieved them. Yet, very few companies have appraisals that go above and beyond -- considering employees' performance as it relates to the environment or society. As a result, employees see their impact on sustainability and social issues as a nice "to do" -- not a "must do" -- part of their jobs. They don't have to make tough decisions about trade-offs between profits and environmental impacts and they are not focused on making win/win/win decisions with respect to profit, people and planet.
Motivating Performance in 2011
What can be done about this? It's obviously too late to change how individuals are being appraised based on their 2010 performances, but 2011 is a whole new year. This is exactly the right time to set goals for each employee within your organization that include social and environmental -- in addition to goals for financial performance. If this is not done, supporting sustainability will remain a nice "to do," not a "must do" part of your overall strategy. On the other hand, if these goals are included, there's a much better chance employees will be motivated to find win/win/win actions.
One last point about performance management that's worth sharing: research at the Center for Effective Organizations on performance appraisal systems show that they often are not very effective at motivating behavior. However, when they include the right approach to goal setting, they do tend to have a positive effect on motivation. Not any kind of goals will do; they need to be specific and progress toward them measurable. Difficulty is also important. If the goals are too difficult, people either don't try to achieve them or cut corners and cheat in order to reach them, as in the case of Enron. If the goals are too easy, they motivate mediocre performance. But if they are challenging, but achievable -- they motivate good performance.
Let's look at the facts. The failure of most organizations to evaluate their employees on social and environmental performance measures is symptomatic of a larger problem. Most organizations, whether they are for-profit or not, fail to implement management approaches and systems that create sustainable effectiveness. They are managed to optimize short-term financial performance, not long-term financial, social and environmental performance. Changing the performance management system is just one step in the right direction, but it's a necessary and important step.
Edward E. Lawler III is co-author of Management Reset: Organizing for Sustainable Effectiveness. A distinguished professor of business at the University of Southern California (USC) Marshall School of Business, he is also the founder and director of the University's Center for Effective Organizations (CEO), one of the country's leading management research organizations.
What's the real objective, here? To try and go 'green', right, so, don't talk about it, don't hold meetings about it, just DO it. Buy 'green' stuff, meaning, biodegradable soaps and materials that are recycled and all that stuff. One nice thing about recycled stuff is that sometimes, it can be less expensive, while still providing the same general quality. Paper's a great material to do that with. But, as with any resource, the less you use, the better off you are overall. Problem: The modern business office uses TONS of paper, per year. Even small offices can go through many cases of paper in a month, not to mention a year. How to do less, with more? Efficiency's the big thing, and trying to prevent waste.
Social responsibility. The public doesn't really look at the corporate world in a favorable light, because corporations control a lot of money, have a lot of political clout, and they make things like products for the defense industry, and of course all the ballyhoo about energy. So, the pressure's on for the business world to clean up its' act. Comma. The business world provides goods and services for the public, so the public also needs to clean up ITS act, to complete the puzzle. People, that's what it comes down to, whether they wear t-shirts or business suits, it's the cumulative actions of people that impact stuff like the environment, and the economy. I say invent that better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door, and if a company or many companies can successfully market the 'green' angle, and the public is likewise of a mind to support and participate, the net result for all concerned can be a great improvement.
The comments to date have been, but I'm a lowly xxx, how do I make a difference? Very simple, let's say the company is committed to going green, socially responsible *employees* should NOT be driving SUVs, nor should they be commuting more than 10 miles each way, and I'm being generous with the 10 miles. SUVs and "McHomes" out in cleaverville ex-burbs are murdering the ecosystem, companies are not doing the damage, but they can prevent/reverse it.
Employees that share the company's commitment to environmental stewardship will be reward at the end of the year, those who do not, will not be rewarded. It costs the company very little, and provides a fairly large reward to the community.
I can hear the conservatives and libertarians crying whining already, but that's a way to do it.
......Rewarding an employee for trying to be "green" is an idealistic concept, but in the end, I believe, what will happen is that companies will then chose not to hire anyone who drives an SUV so they do not have to pay a reward that is taxable. So, you say, throw a party instead which is non-taxable? What will that do for the morale of the employees who do not believe a company should have the right to dictate what kind of vehicle they can drive if it is being sold on the market? What does that have to do with your job?
......So, here is another category of questions to decide if you will be hired or not? What kind of car do you drive? What kind of gas do you use? Do you ride your brakes? Do you warm your car up before driving (government says you only need 30 seconds)?
......We are supposed to be living in a democratic country not a dictatorship. This kind of control by companies will only lead to dictatorship.
......Let's see how do you evaluate an excellent bookkeeper (not an accountant) on societal or environmental impact....I guess if another employee doesn't like them or they don't belong to Facebook or LinkedIn or showing signs of physical aging or doesn't dress in the modern look of the day, doesn't use recycled paper for hard copies or still writes checks by hand?
.....No wonder unemployment is so high and will continue to be high (won't show in statistics though). The hiring-firing assembly line is here to stay and will be growing.