4 ms·

Another (frankly more likely) possibility is that people think they deserve more recognition than they actually do. This post is based on the premise that it is

by poet 16y ago

Another (frankly more likely) possibility is that people think they deserve more recognition than they actually do. This post is based on the premise that it is the employer's fault and that doesn't necessarily follow.

petercooper 16y ago
I'd agree if this post were talking about anything beyond basic levels of recognition for minor tasks. It's not talking about significant recognition/awards, merely frequently feedback and "thanks" type stuff. Don't we all deserve the occasional thanks from our managers when we actually do stuff? (Needless question for me as I work for myself ;-))
- nettdata 16y ago
  The vast majority of managers I've encountered only focus on the stuff that is wrong, or was done poorly. The ROI on a simple "attaboy" is huge, especially when done in a group environment. In our morning meetings, people update their status on the work they're doing. Even a simple "nice!" when warranted goes a long way, making them feel good in front of the group, and giving them a nice attitude for the rest of the day.
dpritchett 16y ago
I imagine it's more common to be underutilized or misapplied. Humans tend to grow and change much faster than their corporate job descriptions can keep up with. There's always a mismatch, it's just a question of whether or not the key players acknowledge it - and of how much indulgence is afforded to the employee in terms of personal growth that may not perfectly align with current business objectives.
- dpritchett 16y ago
  Google apparently has a system in place for enabling this truest form of employee engagement: Google has set up an environment that makes it pretty easy for people to transfer between groups, and even between sites. You have to be a grown-up about it, of course, and not ditch your team during some critical crunch time. But provided you exercise mature judgment in the matter, you can pretty much switch teams whenever you want, and it doesn't cause the company to grind to a halt, as such a policy would at other places I've worked or visited. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html
  - christkv 16y ago
    Does that not assume that somebody else is switching with you. What if you got a sucky group and nobody wants to switch ?
random42 16y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
wynand 16y ago
Why do you think it's more likely that employees are in the wrong? The asymmetry of the relationship makes it more likely for the employee to be get the short end of the stick. It's not inspiration and respect that get passed down the corporate ladder (in most companies). Many employees don't speak up for fear of repercussions (they are at the mercy of their managers, after all).

by poet 16y ago

petercooper 16y ago

I'd agree if this post were talking about anything beyond basic levels of recognition for minor tasks. It's not talking about significant recognition/awards, merely frequently feedback and "thanks" type stuff. Don't we all deserve the occasional thanks from our managers when we actually do stuff? (Needless question for me as I work for myself ;-))

nettdata 16y ago
The vast majority of managers I've encountered only focus on the stuff that is wrong, or was done poorly. The ROI on a simple "attaboy" is huge, especially when done in a group environment. In our morning meetings, people update their status on the work they're doing. Even a simple "nice!" when warranted goes a long way, making them feel good in front of the group, and giving them a nice attitude for the rest of the day.

dpritchett 16y ago

I imagine it's more common to be underutilized or misapplied. Humans tend to grow and change much faster than their corporate job descriptions can keep up with. There's always a mismatch, it's just a question of whether or not the key players acknowledge it - and of how much indulgence is afforded to the employee in terms of personal growth that may not perfectly align with current business objectives.

dpritchett 16y ago
Google apparently has a system in place for enabling this truest form of employee engagement: Google has set up an environment that makes it pretty easy for people to transfer between groups, and even between sites. You have to be a grown-up about it, of course, and not ditch your team during some critical crunch time. But provided you exercise mature judgment in the matter, you can pretty much switch teams whenever you want, and it doesn't cause the company to grind to a halt, as such a policy would at other places I've worked or visited. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html
- christkv 16y ago
  Does that not assume that somebody else is switching with you. What if you got a sucky group and nobody wants to switch ?

random42 16y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

wynand 16y ago

Why do you think it's more likely that employees are in the wrong? The asymmetry of the relationship makes it more likely for the employee to be get the short end of the stick. It's not inspiration and respect that get passed down the corporate ladder (in most companies). Many employees don't speak up for fear of repercussions (they are at the mercy of their managers, after all).