Remember Frederic Herzberg’s research on what motivates people (see Chapter 14, “The Compensation Conundrum”)? He asserted that it takes real motivators to inspire people to extend themselves on the job. These include recognition, control over one’s own work, and gaining satisfaction from the job. In this chapter we’ll explore how these motivational factors can be built right into the job itself.

If you enjoy your work, if the job gives you satisfaction, if you can’t wait to go to work every morning and hate to leave each evening, there’s no need for any other type of motivation. Are there such jobs? Although many new jobs in growth industries have the ingredients for enjoyment and satisfaction, a large number of jobs are routine, dull, and sometimes tedious. It’s difficult—if not impossible—to generate excitement about these jobs.

One way to make dull jobs more “worker friendly” is to redesign them. Rather than looking at a job as a series of tasks that must be performed, study it as a total process. Make the job less routine by enlarging the scope of the job. Focus on what has to be accomplished rather than on the steps leading to its accomplishment. You can do all of this by redesigning the manner in which the job is performed.

Try looking at each of the jobs you supervise from the viewpoint of the person performing it—not just for efficiency in performance, but as a vehicle for using his or her talents and creative powers. The following sections have some ideas for accomplishing this.

There are many types of work for which production quotas are established. Word processing operators are given the number of letters they must complete each day; production workers are given hourly quotas; salespeople must meet monthly standards. Management usually sets these quotas. Most workers don’t like having quotas imposed on them. Worse yet, if management wants to raise quotas, employees are resentful and resistant.

A solution is to have your staff participate in setting quotas for their own jobs. You might think that they’ll set low quotas that are easy to meet, and this might happen. That’s why the process is participatory. As a manager, you don’t step out of the picture completely; you are one of the participants. Your role is to ensure that realistic goals are set. In most cases people do set reasonable quotas; because it’s their goal, they accept it and work to achieve it.

There’s a great deal of controversy over what motivates people most effectively. From my many years of working with both managers and employees on motivation problems, I have culled the following as some of the best techniques for motivating people to commit themselves to superior performance:

You can determine the greatest motivators for the people you supervise by getting feedback on the various approaches you use and revising your methods based on your findings.

Sometimes threatening to fire people if they don’t work is effective—at least temporarily. When jobs are scarce and people know that they won’t have a job if they get fired, they do the work. But how much work do they do? Some folks work just enough to keep from getting fired—and not one bit more.

Fear of being fired isn’t real motivation; real motivation spurs people to produce more than just what’s necessary to keep their jobs. Additionally, fear of being fired becomes less a motivator as the job market expands. If comparable jobs are available in more amenable environments, why work for a tyrant?

Yet, there are people who do respond to negative motivation. Maybe they’ve been raised by intimidating parents or have worked under tyrannical bosses for so long that it’s the only way of life they understand. Good leaders must recognize each person’s individualities and adapt the motivators they use to what works best for him or her.

Not everybody is interested in promotion. Lots of workers are happy to just do their jobs, get their annual raises, and not worry about taking on added responsibilities. For these people, offering opportunity for advancement is not a motivator. However, if a person is ambitious and looks forward to moving ahead in the company, opportunity for advancement can be a major motivator.

This is not necessarily a negative factor. Such people can be the rock foundation of a company. They are trading advancement and raises for their preferred lifestyle. This is common for some older workers, and is more and more prevalent among young parents who opt to devote more time to their growing families.

Some companies have formalized their advancement strategies by identifying promotable people early in their careers and working with them to enhance their capabilities. A good example is Kevin, an employee of Southeast Utilities. When he was hired, Kevin went through a series of evaluations and was assigned to a training program. When the program was completed, he was assigned to a team in the technical support department. Over the first few years he was given progressively more important assignments and did very well in each of them.

At his third annual performance review, he was informed that because of his excellent record, he was chosen to participate in the company’s career pathing program. This program served a dual purpose: It gave top-level employees the opportunity to advance and ensured that the expanding needs of the company would be met. Each year several men and women are selected to be assessed and trained to move up the corporate ladder.

The first step in this process was to report to an assessment center where Kevin was given a series of tests and interviews. He also participated in interactive exercises with other participants. After the results were analyzed, he met with the career pathing team of the HR department to discuss its findings, his own ambitions, and the opportunities available in the company.

The HR staff told Kevin there were many opportunities in the organization for a person with his talents and suggested several areas he should consider for his career path. They pointed out that to become better equipped for growth within the company, he should acquire more knowledge in the information technology areas and develop managerial skills.

To start the ball rolling, he was advised to sign up for an advanced computer training program. When he completed this successfully, he would be transferred to a position in the IT department where he could hone these skills. In addition, to prepare him for eventual promotion to management, he was counseled to enroll in an MBA program at the local university under the company’s tuition reimbursement plan.

Career pathing programs take much time and effort on the parts of both the management and the selected employees. They pay off in building a highly motivated group of potential managers. To make the career pathing program even more effective, assign a mentor to each “career pather”—a senior manager to guide him or her over the bumps and hurdles.

When you read about or attend meetings on motivation, the one word that almost always pops up is “empowerment.” You’re told that if you empower people they will be motivated. What exactly does that mean? Empowerment means sharing your power with the people over whom you have power. Team members are given the authority to make decisions that previously were reserved for managers.

This is easier said than done. Some leaders don’t want to give up their power—and some people don’t want to take the responsibility that goes with power. Let’s look at empowerment as a motivating factor.

In most companies, power is in the hands of management. In a typical hierarchy, the power flows downward from the CEO through the layers of management. Each layer has power over the one beneath it. Your boss gives you an assignment; you look it over, determine how it should be done, and assign various components of the job to your subordinates. Your job is to follow it through until it’s completed.

Empowerment changes this process. You share with your staff the power to make decisions about an assignment. Rather than telling each person what to do, you work together to plan and execute the entire project.

The concept of empowerment isn’t entirely new. For years companies have engaged in a variation called participative management. Empowerment carries participation one step further. Team members not only participate in decision making; they are authorized to make decisions on their own without seeking approval from higher-level managers.

Here’s an example of empowerment at work: The installation of a new sprinkler system at the Woodbury Golf Club was the biggest job that All-Star Landscaping had ever received. Bill, the owner/manager, had just attended a management seminar on empowerment and thought that this project was a good chance to put into practice what he had learned in the course.

A few weeks before the job was to begin, Bill invited his team members to his home for a breakfast meeting to discuss the job. He outlined the project and asked for ideas about how to proceed. One associate suggested that, while completing their routine landscaping work at the club, they could identify the best locations for the sprinkler heads and save the time and cost of a special survey. Another volunteered to examine the current system to determine which parts, if any, could be incorporated into the new system.

At their next meeting, the team planned the entire job and agreed on who would complete each part. When the work began, the team went to work full of enthusiasm because they had been completely involved in the planning. During the installation, as problems arose, the team members were empowered to make independent decisions to correct them. Bill reported that if he had just assigned the work to his team members and required them to come to him to solve every problem, it would have taken longer and cost more. The workers would have looked at it as just another job.

Empowerment has its upside and its downside. Let’s look at some positive effects of empowering employees.

You’ve heard the expression “Two heads are better than one.” Perhaps 10 heads are even better. People who work on a job know a great deal more about what’s going on in their working environments than many managers realize. They see things that are done inefficiently, and they have ideas for improvement. By eliciting their input about new projects and assignments, you’re likely to pick up ideas that might not have occurred to you.

When a group of people work together to generate ideas, a suggestion made by one participant can trigger ideas from another. This process leads to an abundance of ideas from an empowered team, often called synergy. However, synergy isn’t limited to generating ideas. Synergy is defined as “two or more units (people, in this case) working together to achieve a greater effect than individuals can do by themselves.” This is what happens in an empowered team.

If Bill’s landscapers had worked individually to perform the sprinkler installation, it would have taken longer and most likely mistakes would have been made. These mistakes would have to be corrected, taking more time. By working as an empowered team, each person knew what the others were doing and, if help was needed, could pitch in.

When all members of an empowered team are engaged in the same type of work, each person should be trained to do all aspects of that work. However, some teams are multifunctional—they consist of people from different disciplines. Although each member of a team made up of marketing, engineering, and finance specialists cannot be expected to do the jobs of their colleagues in other areas of expertise, their total involvement in the planning process lets them know exactly what each team member is doing. The results are a coordinated effort and goals that are easier to achieve.

Empowering workers is not a magic formula. Empowerment can be a great way to motivate people to accomplish superior work—but it doesn’t always work. Some managers are reluctant to empower people and some people don’t want to be empowered. Let’s look at some of these problems.

People who have worked hard to be promoted to managerial positions often believe that empowering their subordinates will diminish their own positions. Some managers feel they are losing status by sharing power with the team; this simply isn’t true. The difference is not in rank or position, but in methodology. Rather than being “boss,” you teach, inspire, and motivate your team. Being the leader of an empowered team is a position high in status.

Some managers worry about losing control. They ask, “If I’m still responsible for this department, how can I give up my power without losing control?” You don’t have to lose control when you share power. You’re a member of the team. You’re directly in the midst of every activity and know how each team project is progressing. You are aware of this, and so is every member of your team. Control becomes team control. As team leader, you guide your team to meet performance standards.

Wendy was perplexed. She thought that her team members would be excited and enthusiastic about their company’s move to empowered teams. Instead, she realized that several people were upset. Here are some of the things they said:

As you can see, not everyone is thrilled to be empowered. Sometimes you have to sell people on the idea. Your first job as team leader of a newly empowered team is to convert people who think this way into enthusiastic supporters of the new method. Here are some suggestions that might help you do this:

Some managers fear that their company will have no need for them once empowerment becomes the way of organizational life. If everyone is involved in what managers traditionally do, what role is left for managers? In some companies, the job of the team leader has been redesigned. Variations of self-directed teams, which usually have no permanent team leader, replace traditional teams.

Rarely does a company have entirely self-directed teams. Instead, the team chooses a project leader (or two or more leaders) for each project. Because most teams work on multiple projects, a permanent team leader usually serves the important purposes of coordinating all team activities and providing training and support.

Empowerment isn’t a panacea for curing all management problems. Rather, it enhances collaborative efforts to get a job accomplished by giving every member of a team the power to get things done. When management is sincere about empowerment and applies it in a meaningful manner, the chances of success are increased.

In General Motors’s Saturn division, any assembly line worker can push the button that stops the line if he or she sees something that needs correction (a power most companies reserve for managers). One GM employee reported on television that he “pushed that button once,” after he realized that a part had not been inserted properly on a chassis. The correction took just a few seconds, but the employee said that it made him feel good that he had the power to stop the line and that he was able to help maintain the quality of GM’s cars.

Keep in mind that for your empowerment program to succeed, the program must have full support from top management. Empowerment works most effectively when a company’s CEO empowers its senior management group, which in turn, passes that empowerment down through the organization. Because many companies assume that the transition to empowerment is more difficult for rank-and-file employees than for team leaders and managers, often they concentrate their training on that group. However, because the program is collaborative, team leaders and team members should be trained together by consultants or others who are knowledgeable in this type of work.

All team members should be given full information about team projects. They should have support to acquire necessary skills and techniques, and freedom to interact with the team leader and any team member to accomplish goals. It also is very important for upper management to encourage team members to use initiative when planning and implementing projects.

Many organizations have excellent training programs for orienting and starting an empowered team program. However, once the program is underway they assume that it will work smoothly. As teams mature, many initial problems are overcome, but new problems do occur. Reinforcement training meetings should be held periodically to discuss and resolve complexities that develop. In addition, counseling should be available to assist people who have difficulty adjusting to the new techniques.

In theory, everyone can be trained to be a leader; in practice, it doesn’t always work. Some people aren’t emotionally suited for leadership roles; they just aren’t motivated to assume these types of duties. These people will not or cannot change their patterns of behavior from authoritarianism to participation. Allowing these types of employees to remain in leadership positions is destructive; they must be removed. Highly motivated, well-trained, committed team leaders are essential to the success of empowered teams.