Pitfalls and Best Practices in Requirements Engineering and Management - Requirements Engineering and Management for Software Development Projects - page 200

The activities are performed, perhaps on a regular basis, as I saw in many orga-
nizations, but these are not transparent to the employees. These are not based on
any policy definitions, or set targets. When this happens, employees suspect cloak-
and-dagger methods and this sets wrong expectations in the employees. Wrong
expectations of employees can never be met leading to demotivation of the indi-
viduals. The best practice is to set right expectations in the employees by explicit
declaration of relevant policies.
The carrot-and-stick theory implies reward for good work and punishment for bad
work. When this theory is implemented scrupulously it would yield wonderful
results. But any laxity in its implementation or any instances of non-implementation
would water down the results. As Douglas McGregor said the discipline should be
like a hot stove. It should cause a burn without any bias to anyone who touches it; the
burn should be commensurate with the amount of touch; and the burn should be
immediate. If handing the stick is not handled in the way of a hot stove, it is bound to
produce unpredictable results. The pitfall of many organizations is to deviate from
the hot stove theory when handling disciplinary cases.
There is a misconception that all the rewards ought to be financial in nature.
They need not be. Many people are motivated by recognition more than by money.
Most people crave more for affection and recognition than money. A meeting with
the Chairman of the company motivates a person much more than a week's salary,
perhaps. Many organizations do give rewards to their employees, some financial
and some non-financial in nature. While they do so, it sometimes happens that the
same person keeps getting the reward successively every time. The person may be
a super performer and richly deserves it having earned it by sheer performance,
every time. But this would have a demotivating effect on the others who just stop
trying for the award being unable to compete with the super performer. When we
have a super performer on our hands, we ought to find different ways of motivating
that individual. We may promote him/her or give a higher rate of pay. But we need
to give the reward to others too. All the employees should see the possibility of
winning the award. Only then, they would try to excel.
Similarly, modern organizations are shying away from giving negative rewards
(punishments). In the days gone by, organizations relied entirely on negative
rewards and the world has come full circle with the organizations relying only on
positive rewards. While positive rewards propel employees towards better per-
formance and excellence, negative rewards keep them from indiscipline and work
to the detriment of the team performance. Negative rewards are the ones that
prevent a person from being selfish and goad the individual towards cooperating
with the team. Ultimately organizations require success of the team. Think of it as
a team that has but one super player playing to project him/her in the limelight at
the cost of other players. Would that team win the shield? The team that collab-
orates with each other working shoulder to shoulder would be the winner ulti-
mately. To foster teamwork among the staff, we need to ensure that every one on
the team has a chance of getting recognition and reward as well as receiving
negative reward for negative performance.