There are few things as lively as a motivated workforce. Except perhaps the debate about how to get a motivated workforce in the first place. In safety, one of the most controversial motivation topics is the use of incentives. Are they the wonder tool for increasing participation and results that many claim them to be? Or are they an unhelpful crutch that masks true performance and distracts from the things that matter?
Incentives most often take the form of offering individual or group goods, merchandise, or cash contingent either on outcomes (such as incident frequency) or participation in safety activities. Some incentives include bonuses or awards for group performance, the performance of safety activities, or even tie safety to individual performance and compensation. Not to be confused with recognition activities, which are used to acknowledge and celebrate safety achievements after the fact, incentives are specifically designed to try and induce those achievements.
While some people swear by their incentive programs, there are a few things that should give any leader pause. For one thing, incentives are transactional motivators that work by offering an exchange. If you’re considering incentives, here are a few of the drawbacks we’ve observed in other companies:
- Incentives Reward (or Punish) People for Things They Can’t Control – Incentives tied to outcomes (like fewer injuries) hold people accountable for things that may not be theirs to control – like how well the organization controls exposure or even what people do on another shift. Not surprisingly, many organizations have seen incentives discourage reporting of injuries, encourage the “creative classification” of incidents, provide weak feedback and reinforcement for safety activities, and even create a sense of entitlement that taints the value of safety performance.
- Incentives Trivialize Safety – Even tied to inherently worthwhile activities such as safety observations or hazard reduction, offering an exchange says that these activities are an “extra” rather than a real part of how we work here. We’re telling people that the reason for the activity is the reward. Consider this: if you later withdraw the reward, what reason left is there to continue it?
- Incentives Put the Focus on Numbers – Participation-focused incentives put the emphasis on the “mechanical” action (going to the safety meeting, performing the observation, etc.) without assuring that the activity is impactful or sustainable.
- Incentives Overemphasize Tactical Thinking – Safety incentives at the senior level can actually be effective to a certain extent; leaders are more often in control of the means to achieve outcomes and are ultimately responsible for them. Even there, however, incentives can foster an overemphasis on tactical thinking. If I am measured and compensated on a specific metric (for instance recordable rates or workers comp cases), I am more likely to focus on that area to the exclusion of larger issues, such as the real values needed to be an effective safety leader.
- Incentives Miss What Really Drives People – As pointed out by Herzberg and others, the most important work-related motivating factors have nothing to do with pay, benefits, or other external elements. These things are important, but providing them actually only brings the organization to a neutral position. What’s most important to driving interest in work performance is achievement, recognition, and the work itself.
In our experience, the more effective method of motivation is doing things to connect employees to safety on a personal level. This means giving them meaningful (and real) roles in improving safety, actively doing things on behalf of safety improvement.
Our advice? Give people actual responsibilities in making the mechanisms and process of safety work and save the prizes for celebrating a job well done.
___
There are few things as lively as a motivated workforce. Except perhaps the debate about how to get a motivated workforce in the first place. In safety, one of the most controversial motivation topics is the use of incentives. Are they the wonder tool for increasing participation and results that many claim them to be? Or are they an unhelpful crutch that masks true performance and distracts from the things that matter?
Incentives most often take the form of offering individual or group goods, merchandise, or cash contingent either on outcomes (such as incident frequency) or participation in safety activities. Some incentives include bonuses or awards for group performance, the performance of safety activities, or even tying safety to performance and compensation. Not to be confused with recognition activities, which are used to acknowledge and celebrate safety achievements after the fact, incentives are specifically designed to try and induce those achievements.
While some people swear by their incentive programs, there are a few things that should give any leader pause. For one thing, incentives are transactional motivators that work by offering an exchange. If you’re considering incentives, there are some of the drawbacks we’ve observed in other companies:
· Incentives Reward (or Punish) People for Things They Can’t Control – Incentives tied to outcomes (like fewer injuries) hold people accountable for things that may not be theirs to control – like how well the organization controls exposure or even what people do on another shift. Not surprisingly, many organizations have seen incentives discourage reporting of injuries, encourage the “creative classification” of incidents, provide weak feedback and reinforcement for safety activities, and even create a sense of entitlement that taints the value of safety performance.
· Incentives Trivialize Safety – Even tied to inherently worthwhile activities such as safety observations or hazard reduction, offering an exchange says that these activities are an “extra” rather than a real part of how we work here. We’re telling people that the reason for the activity is the reward. Consider this: if you later withdraw the reward, what reason left is there to continue it?
· Incentives Put the Focus on Numbers – Participation-focused incentives put the emphasis on the “mechanical” action (going to the safety meeting, performing the observation, etc.) without assuring that the activity is impactful or sustainable.
· Incentives Overemphasize Tactical Thinking – Safety incentives at the senior level can actually be effective to a certain extent; leaders are more often in control of the means to achieve outcomes and are ultimately responsible for them. Even there, however, incentives can foster an overemphasis on tactical thinking. If I am measured and compensated on a specific metric (for instance recordable rates or workers comp cases), I am more likely to focus on that area to the exclusion of larger issues, such as the real values needed to be an effective safety leader.
· Incentives Miss What Really Drives People – As pointed out by Herzberg and others, the most important work-related motivating factors have nothing to do with pay, benefits, or other external elements. These things are important, but providing them actually only brings the organization to a neutral position. What’s most important to driving interest in work performance is achievement, recognition, and the work itself.
In our experience, the more effective method of motivation is doing things to connect employees to safety on a personal level. This means giving them meaningful (and real) roles in improving safety, actively doing things on behalf of safety improvement. Give employees actual responsibilities in making the mechanisms and process of safety work.
Our advice? Give people a say in how safety is managed and save the prizes to celebrate a job well done.
___
