In a message dated 97-02-19 23:16:05 EST, Gchapman@admin.usf.edu (Chapman,
Greg) writes:
" How to resolve "Individual Compensation VS.
Team Participation, and move toward "Individual AND Team Participation
Compensation Packages"; while maintaining a coherent respect for balancing
results with process? "
Dear Greg Chapman,
Your concern regarding team participation versus individual
results oriented compensation is a common concern. I believe you can
solve the problem by using two different structural forms of performance
evaluation and integrate them with a formula that reflects the values of
your organization. Or, you can simply say both are equally important and
create a 50/50 mix.
First, on the individual performance/results side, you can use
your traditional indicators, whatever they may be. Normally,
organizations like yours have key indicators that have had historic
significance and value.
Secondly, on the team participation side, I would suggest a 360
Degree assessment tool called the Goal Evaluation and Matrix
Analysis-Leadership Development (GEMA-Lead). This instrument powerfully
encourages individual and group movement from withdrawal toward
connection; from domination toward cooperation; and from the striving
toward individualistic superiority toward organizational contribution.
You may want to break out different groups in the analysis such as 1)
administration, 2) faculty, 3) staff, and 4) a self appraisal. GEMA-Lead
creates an inter-correlation matrix to control halo effects. Essentially,
individual respondents who do not correlate in a highly positive way with
the group mean are eliminated from the analysis. In this way, we
eliminate overly positive and negative ratings. In the event that a
particular group or team creates a "groupthink" or a "silent conspiracy"
to inflate their ratings, the checks and balances created from using other
observer groups (such as administration or clerical staff) tends to
counter the self inflation tendencies. However, this has historically not
been a serious problem and is easily detected when it does occur.
The self rating provides a contrast between the perception of the
individual and the averaged group perception. This discrepancy is often
quite sobering for the individual as most of us believe we are more
connected, more cooperative, and more of a contributor than we actually
are. This information is energizing and thus eliminates teamwork entropy
when applied periodically. Greater levels of teamwork can be achieved on
a continuous improvement cycle and these results can be measured.
This is not a "zero-sum" trade-off. It is often fascinating to
note that those with higher scores on connection, cooperation, and
contribution (and consequently lower scores on withdrawal, domination, and
individualistic superiority striving) are also your higher performers in
the context of "hard" results oriented data. If nothing else, this
observation tends to demonstrate the theoretical point that those who
learn more from others are in a position to teach more for others and,
consequently, master the tasks at a higher level than those who focus on
their individualistic strivings within their own goal oriented private
logic.
There is the additional advantage of creating group norms for the
particular group being evaluated. By definition, one half of the group
will fall below the median on each dimension and this has the effect of
stimulating an interest for each individual in being more connected,
cooperative, and contributing. In this way, it also measures the movement
of internal team dynamics over time. Because it is a repeated measures
device, there is always the opportunity to improve and strive more
diligently toward real teamwork without the abandonment of individual
recognition for uniquely contributed results.
We are socially embedded in the context of work as a task of life,
with the psychological goal of being useful. However, our lives are
incomplete without the striving toward belonging (task of interpersonal
relations) and toward individual significance (task of self-development).
It is in the context of this synergy that we observe happy individuals
contributing positively to humanity and the continual ascendance of
civilization.
If you are interested in the "Team Transformation Process" diagram
and clearly communicates this systems perspective and a sample of the
GEMA-Lead color graphics scoring format, please e-mail your request re:
GEMA.
You can receive the demo file in Microsoft Excel 5.0 format, via
AOL, or a hard copy if you send your mailing address.
Warm regards,
DavidCLT@AOL.com
David L. Hanson, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
Synergistic Psychology Associates, P.A.
Suite 204 Cameron-Brown Building
301 South McDowell Street
Charlotte, NC 28204-2622
"Leading Teams to Real Teamwork"
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>