Typical mistakes in motivation. Proper motivation of subordinates

Almost all managers ask themselves: how to motivate employees. We will analyze mistakes and recommendations in this area in the article. Regardless of whether you are the owner of a large concern or a small enterprise, the desire for employees to work conscientiously is present in any case. How to encourage staff to work and devote themselves to their activities, and not just come to the office and, after serving the required eight hours, go home. After all, the success of a company largely depends on how subordinates work.

Staff motivation- enough actual topic various conferences, literary publications and Internet sites. So, let's try to consider how best to motivate employees, and what are the main mistakes of managers, using a slightly non-standard approach.

Let's start by considering those factors that will definitely not only not bring you success in stimulating the efficiency of your subordinates, but, on the contrary, will reduce their interest in obtaining at least some results.

Mistakes in staff motivation

Many managers and bosses tend to think that salary is the only correct approach to a subordinate. Thus, when offering a person a good salary, they do not think about other factors that could affect the employee’s performance. This often leads to the loss of valuable personnel, as staff motivation– this is not only a high salary, but also other significant moments: relationships that develop in the team, the environment and working conditions, the accepted foundations of the company, and so on. An employee is more likely to work for a company where he will be treated with respect, have a comfortable place to work and standard rules than in one where, although the salary will be higher, the conditions will cause discomfort and...

Another common mistake in management behavior is singling out specific employees as their favorites. This mistake is even more common not in the permanent staff of the organization, but in the case of hiring temporary contract employees. Often, the boss in this case singles out those who have worked in the organization for a long time and are part of it, and does not notice those who have come again or treats them as secondary employees. In this case, the motivation of the staff turns out to be partial - those who are treated better by management try to justify their trust, while the rest are negligent in their work because they do not feel they are needed.

Very often, staff motivation for work disappears due to its routine and routine. Management arranges work assignments in such a way that employees begin to feel as if they will not receive promotions or bonuses in this company, and nothing depends on how they do the work and how hard they try. Of course, in this case, the desire to work effectively disappears, and subordinates begin to understand that they can simply come to work, complete the assigned monotonous tasks without interest, and go home. Constant repetition of actions and movements causes people to lose interest in work, which reduces overall motivation. It is necessary to diversify the assigned tasks, interest and allow people to express themselves, otherwise, employees will be pessimistic and their desire to work will be very low.

Many companies, when recruiting personnel, choose specialists with a narrow profile, whose activities are limited to a specific framework, but at the same time they are professionals in this area. This is also a flawed tactic, as if you hire an employee who is a genius, for example, in the field of programming using a certain software product, he will do his job faster than expected. If you have already hired such a specialist, instruct him, in addition to his usual activities, to develop a company logo or draw up a calendar plan, while limiting his professionally familiar tasks. This is an unconventional tactic, but this way you will ensure that the employee feels busy and will learn additional skills. After one month of different-profile work, from now on he will stop considering himself a genius and will work all the required hours. This is also an erroneous tactic common among managers: a good specialist will simply go where he will be appreciated, and the company will be left without an employee.

There are bosses who believe that the employee already owes them for working in the company. Therefore, if an employee has completed a successful project that led to profit, he should under no circumstances consider that he is to blame for anything - he simply did what he had to do. Thus, the boss treats his subordinates like robots, excluding gratitude and praise in communication and constantly emphasizing that they mean nothing to the company. In this case, the motivation of employees to work successfully is zero, because no one will appreciate it anyway. Another mistake is to attribute all successes only to the activities of senior employees, and not to single out ordinary managers and developers. Then people will also lose all interest in work, because in fact, any employee wants to be noticed and appreciated.

When management treats staff as soulless beings who are on the same level as a printer, scanner or computer, a response should be expected. Many managers believe that only they have personal life circumstances, peculiarities of mood and mental state, or health problems, and subordinates are only means for performing assigned tasks, who have no right to either personal or emotional characteristics. Accordingly, if a subordinate asks for a day off, such a boss immediately fires him without trying to get into his position. For this reason, the company is losing quality personnel, there is a constant turnover of personnel, and no one thinks about how to motivate employees to achieve the goals set for the company.

So, we have examined management behavior options that reduce employee motivation to work for the benefit of the company and lead to ineffective performance of the entire staff as a whole. In fact, the situations that were given are quite common, and such mistakes are made by many bosses and managers. Next, we will consider how a manager should behave so that the staff’s motivation to work is maximized, and, consequently, the productivity of each employee.

Proper motivation of subordinates.

One of the most common ways stimulating subordinates to work is piecework wages. Thus, the employee receives a certain part of the salary in any case, and the second half depending on how efficiently he completes the work. Efficiency for each industry can be different: for managers it is the number of sales, for a worker it is the number of products manufactured, and so on. Of course, anyone wants to increase their monthly income, therefore, understanding that it depends on efficiency, a person will try in every possible way to work harder and better, and this is the goal of motivating employees.

In addition to material rewards, any employee will be pleased to receive other evidence that he is appreciated. It’s not in vain that for a long time, factories and factories used honor boards or meetings at which the most successful were highlighted. Employee of the month is a great way to how to motivate employees, because everyone is pleased to receive a certificate or diploma of the best employee. You can develop your own reward systems that will be individual for your company: for example, gifts with a logo, a bonus day off, or certificates for any promotions and services.

It is not always possible to motivate an employee with a percentage of output or a bonus, while staff motivation is still necessary. In this case, you can resort to stimulation by giving the employee more responsibility and control. A person, feeling that he has been entrusted with even more important tasks, will try to fulfill the expectations that were placed on him. Try to choose the right area of ​​control you can use for this purpose. After the employee shows himself professionally, tell him that for his achievements, you are ready to entrust this or that area of ​​activity under his responsibility.

Great importance The environment that develops in the team also plays a role in the effectiveness of personnel work. If quarrels, constant competition and struggle arise in the team, then effective work cannot be expected from employees. Close-knit team is the key to the success of the entire company. After all, all activities are carried out in stages, and therefore each employee performs important and irreplaceable work. In order for employees to get along better with each other, it is necessary to provide them with the opportunity to communicate more with each other. Perhaps you shouldn’t demand perfect silence in the office while working - let people consult among themselves, but, of course, you shouldn’t forget about discipline. Corporate events, joint trips and holidays will be beneficial. Employee motivation should be aimed at the success of the work of the entire team for the benefit of the company, and not at competition and personal hostility towards each other.

The higher level of staff motivation, the better results the activities of the entire company as a whole will bring. A very important aspect is the person’s interest in further cooperation with this company. To do this, it is necessary to highlight successful employees not only with material rewards, but also with promotions. After all, if a person works in a company, knowing that, in principle, no prospects await him, the work will become uninteresting and aimless for him. So make people feel like they have a chance to achieve more.

Strive to ensure that employees love the company they work for and treat it with a certain amount of patriotism. To do this, you can hold various competitions between your company and competitive firms, sports, and information competitions. It will also be nice for employees to have some little things with your logo, for example, a T-shirt or a notepad.

Do not forget that each person is individual and the motivational approach that is suitable for one person can play the opposite role when used in working with another. Therefore, take your time and conduct several tests among your company’s personnel in order to create a general motivational system that will significantly improve work efficiency all employees. This is exactly what will help you understand how to motivate employees: mistakes and recommendations that you can form into a single system will make it possible to improve the company’s performance.

Errors of this kind are represented by various “defenses,” biases that the subject of the attributional process includes in his actions. The very idea of ​​including motivation in attribution arose already during the first studies of this process. Although consideration of the fundamental attribution error is usually given priority, in reality the emphasis on motivational errors is no less important. The history of appealing to motivationally determined

biases that manifest themselves in attributional processes. Initially, these errors were identified in situations where subjects sought to maintain their self-esteem while attributing reasons for another person's behavior. The magnitude of self-esteem depended to a large extent on whether one attributed it to oneself or to another. successes or failures.

A human tendency was identified to see oneself in a more positive light than would be guaranteed by an impartial position. However, sufficient experimental data was not obtained to confirm this trend, and for some time interest in motivational errors was lost. the fundamental error became the focus of researchers' interest. But as soon as the fear began to arise that in general the entire problematic of attributive processes was too exaggerated the role of rational components in the perception of social objects, a new round of interest emerged both in the problems of motivation of social cognition in general, and in motivational attribution errors in particular.

Although cognitive schemes assume that every “naive observer” essentially acts as a “non-professional scientist”, i.e. more or less rationally, however, in reality there is a “warmer” picture of the attributional process. It includes so-called “hot cognitions,” which has already been proven by psychology. The secret of this “coloring” of cognition in warmer tones, apparently, must be sought in motivation.

In general terms, the need to include motivation in the attributional process is due to the recognition of the fact subjective human interpretation of social reality. It is these subjective interpretations, which inevitably include bias, that lead to important consequences for the further motivation of behavior. However, the opposite is also true: the motivation of behavior largely determines the mechanism by which biased judgments arise. An example of such a mechanism is the occurrence of a motivational attribution error.

Significant development of this problem belongs to B. Weiner. His focus is on ways of attributing causes in situations of success and failure. He proposed to consider three dimensions in every cause:

internal - external;

stable - unstable;

controlled - uncontrolled.

Various combinations of these dimensions yield eight models (possible sets of causes):

1) internal - stable - uncontrolled;

2) internal - stable - controlled;

3) internal - unstable - uncontrollable;

4) internal - unstable - controlled;

5) external - stable - uncontrolled;

6) external - stable - controlled;

7) external - unstable - uncontrollable;

8) external - unstable - controlled.

Weiner suggested that the choice of each combination is due to different motivations. This can be illustrated with the following example. The student answered the lesson poorly. In different cases, he explains his behavior differently: if he referred to low abilities to this subject, then he chooses situation 1; if he admits that he was lazy, then perhaps he chooses situation 2; if he referred to a sudden illness before answering, then chooses situation 3; if you are distracted by watching a TV show - situation 4; if he accused the school of being too demanding, then he chooses situation 5; if the teacher is assessed as bad - then situation 6; if you are just “unlucky”, then situation 7; finally, if a neighbor is renovating the house and constantly knocks, interfering with his work, then it would be appropriate to explain this with situation 8.

As you can see, the process of explaining reasons here includes an idea of ​​the goal being achieved, in other words, it is associated with achievement motivation. A more specific connection was established by Weiner between the choice of cause and success or failure actions. This idea is illustrated by an experiment: the subject is shown a hypothetical person who was either successful or unsuccessful in some task. The difficulty of the task was designated as an “external” reason, and the person’s abilities as an “internal” reason. It has been revealed that if a person is more capable, then his success is attributed to an internal reason, and his failure to an external reason. On the contrary, for a less capable person, success is attributed to an external cause (the task is not too difficult), and failure is attributed to an internal cause (that’s the way he is).

The same effect was also found regarding a person’s status: one type of explanation was given for a high-status person and another type for a low-status person. This has been confirmed experimentally J. Thibault And X. Rikken: the “naive subject” is presented with two “confederates” (persons in cahoots with the experimenter). One of them is dressed ceremoniously, it is said about him that he has just defended his dissertation. The other is dressed shabbily and is said to be a first-year student. The experimenter gives the “naive subject” the task of making a speech in favor of donation and convincing two “Confederates” to immediately donate blood as donors. The "Confederates" listen to the speech and soon report that they are convinced and are going to donate blood. Then the experimenter asks the “naive” to explain why they do this? The answer is different in two cases: the “naive” one believes that the person who defended the dissertation is apparently a highly conscious citizen and made such a decision himself, while the first-year student made such a decision, of course, under the influence of “speech,” i.e. influence from the “naive”. The locus of causality in the first case is internal, in the second - external. Obviously, such a distribution of loci is associated with the status of the perceived face.

Of the three proposed divisions of causes, the first two are better studied: the division of causes into “internal - external” and “stable - unstable”. Moreover, it is precisely manipulations with these two types of reasons that give rise to the majority of motivational errors. As we have seen, the attribution of internal or external causes depends on the status of the perceived, and in the case of evaluating one’s behavior, on self-esteem. The attribution of stable - unstable causes is especially closely related to the recognition of success - failure. If we combine all the experiments concerning the use of these two pairs of reasons, then the result is clear everywhere: in case of success, internal reasons are attributed to oneself, in case of failure, external ones (circumstances); on the contrary, when explaining the reasons for the behavior of another, various options arise that have just been considered. Note that this dependence may vary to a certain extent in different cultural contexts, which will be discussed in more detail below.

This part of attribution research is particularly rich in experimentation. The famous experiment of S. Krantz and S. Rud was used M. I. Nikolyukina[cm. 79]. When analyzing the performance of a certain task, four “classical” factors were recorded, on which, according to Weiner, the nature of any action depends: ability, effort, task difficulty, success. Nikolyukina’s experiment examined attributive processes in a study group: there are always certain expectations regarding the success or failure of each group member in a specific type of activity. The following hypothesis has been proposed:

the successes of those who are on the success scale according to this species worth the activity higher the subject, internal reasons are attributed, and external reasons are attributed to failure; successes of those who stand on the scale below subject, external causes are attributed, and failures- internal.

The subjects were students from several groups. Each of them ranked their fellow students according to their level of competence (success) in some subject (for example, mathematics or literature). On the constructed scale, each student indicated his place. Then the test papers in the relevant subject and the test subjects are informed of the obtained scores. Next, each interpreted the results of the other students. It turned out that if a person placed by me on the scale above me received a more positive assessment than me, then I attribute this to internal reasons (he was subjectively perceived by me as more successful, and the assessment corresponds to this idea). If this student suddenly received a grade lower than “mine,” I attribute this to an external reason (he is actually stronger than me, which means that some external circumstance is “to blame” for the low grade). The reverse logic of reasoning was present when attributing the causes of success and failure to subjects located on the scale below “my” level. Thus, the hypothesis was completely confirmed.

Now we can summarize the consideration of attribution theories in the context of their place in the psychology of social cognition. So, the attributional process begins with the individual’s motivation to understand the causes and consequences of other people’s actions, i.e. ultimately understand the meaning of human relationships. Moreover, a person always has both the need to understand these relationships and the need to predict the further course of these relationships. Unlike theories of cognitive correspondence, in the theory of causal attribution, achieving cognitive correspondence is not a necessary and desirable result of cognitive “work”. Correspondence here is rather a criterion for understanding when a causal explanation seems sufficient. The reason that an individual attributes to a phenomenon (or person) has important consequences for himself, for his feelings and behavior. The meaning of an event and a person's reaction to it are determined to a greater extent by the attributed cause. Therefore, the very search for causes, their adequate choice in various situations is the most important condition for a person’s orientation in the social world around him.

This orientation is a very complex thought process that requires the ability to operate with the information received, as well as “complete” it if it is insufficient. Therefore, the attributional process includes a whole series of not only cognitive, but also motivational operations, as well as taking into account the emotional components of cognition. The analysis of attributive processes is important not only in itself, but serves as an incentive for further deepening into the process of social cognition. Being a kind of forerunner of the psychology of social cognition, the study of attributive processes leaves to its share a number of unsolved problems and unexplained phenomena concerning how a person, drawing information about the world around him, builds an overall image of it in order to function successfully in it.

4. SOCIAL ATTRIBUTION

The unresolved nature of these problems is largely due to the fact that, despite interesting findings in the description of attributional processes, they remain processes inherent individual consciousness. Phenomenon related to social interaction is essentially considered outside the social context. It is no coincidence, therefore, that the entire field of attribution research is becoming an arena of rather heated debate between the American and European traditions in social psychology. IN in this case the point is that attribution studies, if they claim to be included in the psychology of social cognition, must inevitably be included in a social context.

This step was taken by a number of European authors and was embodied in "social attribution theory" originally stated J.-C. Deschamps and the most fully developed M. Houston And J. Jaspars. They emphasize that attributional theories should consider the process of attributing causes specifically social behavior. The traditional approach focused on how individual carries out the attributional process without taking into account the individual’s membership in a particular social group. The new approach emphasizes that an individual attributes something to another on the basis of ideas about his own group, as well as on the basis of ideas about the group to which this “other” belongs. S. Moscovici, for example, argues that we always at first Let's ask which group the person belongs to, and then we begin to attribute to him the reasons for his behavior. In other words, interpretation of another person's behavior and activities is always made on the basis of his group membership.

In addition, the attribution process also takes into account the nature interactions, formed in the group to which the subject of perception belongs. Thus, the number of connections that must be taken into account during the attribution process is multiplied, and thus the process moves even further away from “pure” perception and is supplemented by a whole complex of mental operations. This is an important addition proposed by the theory of social attribution and means an even greater opportunity to consider the attributional process not just as the “core” of social perception, but also as an essential component of social cognition.

At the same time, such an addition “ties” causal attribution to other mechanisms of human cognition of the social world. Since the search for causes appeals to the group affiliation of both the subject and the object of perception, their interaction includes the idea of two groups (“our own” and “alien”) and, therefore, a mechanism inevitably arises social comparison. By this, the attributional process is included in the formation of social identity and intergroup relations, and thereby in the complex context of a wide variety of social phenomena.

The main directions of criticism of traditional concepts of attribution are carried out by the authors of the idea of ​​social attribution on the following positions: a) in traditional concepts the model of the acting person is too “rational” (for example, in the theories of H. Kelly); b) as already noted, the analysis largely ignores the group of membership of both the subject and the object of the attributional process; c) the methodology used in traditional research is predominantly a laboratory experiment, i.e. the application of its results in “real” life is limited; d) many are practically not taken into account important characteristics participants in the process, such as gender, age, and levels of attribution described by F. Heider.

1. Social attribution concerns everyday explanations of the causes and results of people's behavior, taking into account the social conditions in which people live.

2. Its basis is social categorization (of both the subject and the object of the attributional process).

3. It is characterized by the maintenance of a positive image of its group by the receiving subject. This is achieved by using a strategy where the success of one's group and the failure of the out-group are explained internal reasons, and the failure of one’s own group and the success of another group are reasons external.

4 Social attribution is not always based on an opinion shared by all members of the group, i.e. to stereotypes existing in the group. It can also arise on the basis of the “personal” bias of the perceiver.

5. At the same time, social attribution can be created or strengthened based on the development of interaction with other group members [see 66].

It follows from this that social attribution can be based both on stereotypical ideas about another group, and on the direct prejudice of one of the participants in the interaction; the outcome will depend on the nature of the interaction between members of different groups.

The proposed concept acquires special significance in cases where the participants in the attributional process belong to different cultures, primarily to different ethnic groups. Therefore, the idea of ​​social attribution receives detailed development in ethnopsychology. Here, in particular, the differences between representatives of different cultures in committing the fundamental attribution error, and in general the degree of “commitment” to personal (in individualistic cultures) or circumstantial (in collectivistic cultures) attribution are analyzed. Under all conditions, the “social context”, the necessity of which in any socio-psychological research European authors insist, is represented mainly by the membership groups of the participants in the attributional process.

It should be noted that the very idea of ​​the need to take into account the group context in the attributional process was expressed by us back in 1975, when a theoretical scheme for the study of social perception was proposed [see. 114], where the emphasis was placed precisely on the fact that in any variant of perception of another person it is necessary to take into account the group affiliation of both the subject and the object of perception. It also emphasized the idea that in general, under all circumstances of studying the socio-perceptual process (i.e., and analyzing causal attribution), the group context should be dominant. Some research results were reported in the section on the study of attributional processes, led by G. Kelly, at the International Congress of Psychology in Leipzig in 1980. Unfortunately, as in many other cases, the further development of this idea did not gain popularity among Western colleagues (like many other ideas in Russian social psychology).

Therefore, today we often turn to the same ideas, but only in execution and in a much more complete development, in particular, by European authors [see. 103; 104].

The theory of social attribution again appeals to the fact that ideas about the social world (in this case about oneself and about groups) are formed in the course of interaction and communication between elements of the social structure. Thus, from this side, the conclusion about the inseparability of the processes of social cognition, communication and behavior is confirmed. Attributional theories, especially when taking into account modern additions, become not only one of the prerequisites for the psychology of social cognition, but also its essential component.

PROCESS OF SOCIAL INFORMATION PRODUCTION

1. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

When those “additives” that transform social perception into social cognition are established, and their manifestation is described using the example of attributive processes, it becomes clear that the result of a person’s comprehension of the social objects and situations around him is the construction of a holistic image of the social world. Now, in order to study more specifically the methods of this construction, it is necessary to answer at least three questions:

1. How do you work with information about this world? 2. What elements of the social world are highlighted? 3. What mechanisms “serve” the process of constructing the social world?

It has already been noted that the most common way of working with social information is the process categorization - assignment of each new perceived object to a certain class of similar and previously known objects, i.e. to category. “Category,” as it was emphasized, is one of the basic concepts of the concept J. Bruner and in general all of cognitive psychology, which “considers the behavior of the subject as controlled by the process of updating “categories”, or, in other terminology, “cognitive units”. By introducing cognitive units, cognitive psychology comes to the recognition of the Subjective Image in the broad epistemological sense of this concept." Naturally, problems of categorization are also considered in other systems of psychological knowledge. In particular, for social cognition the idea of ​​L. S. Vygotsky and A. N. Leontiev about the role of values in relation to the categorization process. Categorization is possible insofar as people live in a relatively stable world, where objects have more or less invariant characteristics, i.e. meanings, thanks to which a person can identify them. Categorization acts as a tool through which a person systematizes his environment, on the basis of which only one can act in this environment.

Therefore, we can say that in some ways categorization is similar to the attributional process: in both cases, a person comprehends the meaning of the world around him. It is clear that identifying meaning is possible only if all newly perceived objects are considered in some context. But to perceive objects “in context” means to establish an entire system of connections of this object with all other objects and phenomena, and this is a very complex cognitive task, and some ways to simplify it are needed. One of the ways to simplify the cognitive strategy is categorization. Its general function is precisely the ordering and simplification of information received from the outside, which helps to understand the context. The complexity of such a strategy is that the subject of cognition does not simply “simplify” the information received, but, as Bruner puts it, is forced to “go beyond it”, to carry out significant intellectual work on further combining categories in order to obtain a holistic picture. The peculiarity of this “work” is that certain aspects of the information are selected and others modified from in order to achieve a “best fit” within a category.

Despite the universality of the categorization process, a number of problems arise regarding its specific manifestation in social cognition. This can be illustrated by the example of identifying those signs, on the basis of which the categorization process is carried out.

The basis on which objects are placed in one category or another is the similarity of these objects in some way sign. According to A. G. Shmeleva,“especially informative cognitive features are those that differentiate alternative categories". In other words, the differences on this basis should be less significant than the similarities. If we classify a person we meet as “old people,” this means that the differences that exist between “old people” (is it a man or a woman, is it a healthy person or a sick person) are less important to us in this case than the similarities . The person perceived in a specific situation is, first of all, an “old person.” In the same way, for example, at sports competitions for disabled people, we note, first of all, that the participants in this competition are disabled people who have overcome their illnesses or injuries and courageously joined the ranks of the competitors. Differences in the degree and nature of their disabilities have not yet been taken into account. The category “disabled” used is based on the principle of availability common feature.

Often the boundaries of the categories used are quite clear and placing an object within them is not difficult, as was the case, for example, in the examples described. However, sometimes the question of the boundaries of categories is quite complicated: these boundaries are very vague. For example, such a category as “religious people”. What should be considered their common feature: going to church or simply believing in God? This complexity manifests itself even more clearly in relation to broader categories that often characterize rather abstract social phenomena or values. Let's take the category "democrats". In different historical situations, often in the same society, the very idea of ​​democracy is understood very differently in different social groups. What is the “general characteristic” of a democrat if we want to classify the person we meet (or not classify) as a “democrats”? The answer to this question is not so simple.

Therefore, in relation to such broad and sometimes abstract categories, a kind of fragmentation is used; they are subdivided within themselves into so-called subcategories: all well-performing students can be divided into “excellent students” or “good students,” etc. A number of experiments have shown that in relation to social objects, people have formed some relatively stable priorities regarding which categories are primarily used in categorization, and which ones are used next. Thus, in many experiments conducted in mixed groups, subjects first classified group members by ethnicity or gender, and only then by their demonstrated ability on a task or their contribution to the group discussion of the problem.

The next important feature of the categories is their different “complexity”, i.e. full of specific content: we see more in some categories common features than in others. This is especially significant when using categories of social cognition. So, for example, when we perceive people belonging to “our” group (say, ethnic), we recognize in them much more externally distinguishable features than in people of another group: it is known that for many Europeans, all people with pronounced Asian characteristics features - “alike.” How important this is in practical life can be seen from the example of the current situation in our country, when, due to a number of circumstances, the absurd term “person of Caucasian nationality” arose and, in the context of growing criminogenic phenomena, any such “person” indiscriminately begins to arouse the suspicion of law enforcement agencies, which sometimes leads to offensive actions on their part.

Classifying social objects into categories has as its main function serving a person as a guide to action: categorization shortens the path to determining the strategy of behavior, reduces this process to the most short version. This is due to the fact that, as noted in psychosemantics, “... the psychological meaning of any categorization process lies in preparing a solution. Therefore, psychologically, making a decision does not require any noticeable period of time from the subject, since the decision is already actually prepared by assigning the stimulus object to a certain category.” Thus, the connection between perception - thinking - action is drawn. In the perception-thinking link, categorization connects how we perceive the world and how we think about it. The next part of the link - how we think about the world and how we act in it - needs to be examined especially.

Now, if we accept the idea that in the process of transition from perception to cognition we do not just mechanically add something to the process of perception, but actively add it, then it follows from it that in the course of social cognition we really “build” the social world, we construct it. The picture of the social world “built” in this way may turn out to be very different. It is important to take into account all the factors that will cause such differences. The very first condition is to identify the ways in which we collect social information: do we “absorb” it (all or not all?), “complete” it, “distort” it, etc. In the end, here too the questions traditional for any cognitive process arise: “where to look?”, “what to listen to?”, “what to do with what we don’t need?” The whole set of these problems is discussed in the psychology of social cognition in the section “The path of production of social information.” Actually, this term denotes the process that includes selection necessary information, interpretation of its meaning, ways to preserve and reproduce it at the right time.

The authors of these ideas like to cite next example. Imagine yourself arriving on another planet. You encounter things there that are unknown to you - unusual shapes, unusual sounds, everything that was previously absent from your previous experience. How to find meaning in this new environment? What you can learn about this new world is limited by your sensory and cognitive abilities. To understand the situation, you must first establish what is most important to you. After this, try to formulate something about the nature of this “important”, for which you will still have to use previous knowledge about the world. Then new knowledge can be included in the context of old experience. Only after this can you try to adapt to the new. Despite the primitiveness of the plot, it clearly shows the main stages of working with incoming information. Again, these stages are present when working with any information, but in the case of social information, a special kind of distortion arises here that needs to be described in detail.

These problems are best examined in terms of the most common process of social categorization—the way in which each new person is categorized. Because many of us perceivers are “cognitive sluggards,” we want to categorize immediately. The easiest way in this case is to categorize a newly met person by simply placing him in the “person” category. At the same time, we seem to “attack” the social stimulus received by us. This is necessary in order to somehow begin interaction with him. Then, later, you can continue the categorization, assigning the person you met to groups by gender, age, etc.

The continuation of the process of social categorization is determined by a number of factors. Most often, two such factors appear in experiments: “vitality” (brightness), which manifests itself as emotional interest in an object, and “primacy,” determined, as has been repeatedly noted in earlier studies, by the order of presentation of information. Thus, the proposal to categorize the objects seen in the film gave such a result that the categorization was carried out faster and more accurately in the case when the subjects viewed a color rather than a black and white film. At the same time, such motivational and emotional characteristics of the perceiver as his mood also manifested themselves quite intensively. People with a positive attitude were more easily able to decide which category to place a particular object into. In the example of watching a movie, it turned out that after a light, fun movie, categorization was carried out

more effective than after the documentary, although in both cases the same objects were shown.

As for the role of the primacy of the information presented, That according to the same principle of the “cognitive lazy person”, a person categorizes an object more easily and immediately just now presented: he simply “grabs” at what comes to mind faster. T. Higgins and G. King proposed to distinguish between two types of assessment that people use when categorizing: chronic and momentary. The latter depends to a greater extent on the momentary social context, i.e. from the current situation in which the categorization process has to be carried out. Thus, it was revealed that the evening student whom the subject met during classes at the university is categorized according to the principle of “placing” him in some category (group) associated with the characteristics of his educational success, and not at all according to his “long-term” membership in category with which he is associated through work in the company. “Chronic” assessment involves a longer and at the same time thorough process of assigning a person to a certain group.

Whatever additional difficulties may arise in the process of social categorization, it inevitably occurs. The question arises about the duration of this process. Apparently, it can be argued that, in contrast to the categorization of physical objects, the duration or suspension of the process of social categorization depends on how much the subject of perception interested in interaction with the perceived object. If this interest is missing, the categorization process ends:

a girl interested in meeting a young man, after categorizing him as a “married man,” may lose interest in him and therefore not continue the process of more “detailed” categorization. On the contrary, the presence of interest in continuing interaction takes the categorization process to a new level.

This stage is characterized by the fact that after the “primary” categorization, we begin to identify signs in the cognizable object that in one way or another complement the category. Such signs are certain personality traits if another person is perceived. When adding new features to the category to which the subject we perceived was previously assigned, two different situations can arise: when the newly perceived features “fit” into the initial category and when they contradict it. If confirmation of the correctness of a certain category is received, the categorization process when constructing the first impression can be considered complete: the object of perception, as it seems to us, is reliably “placed” in the category. Otherwise, you have to rethink the primary categorization. This process is referred to as process recategorization: The married man he meets is categorized as a “highly successful independent man” and suddenly it turns out that he is at home preparing dinner himself. A whole series of assumptions are made regarding the reasons for this (the mechanism of causal attribution is turned on). Based on them, either the trait stands out that the subject we are interested in is “under the thumb of his wife,” or that he simply has the misfortune of being married “to a very busy, working woman.” In both cases, it is necessary to carry out recategorization - to “translate” the perceived person into some other category.

As you can see, on the way to implementing social categorization, a number of “threats” arise to the adequacy of the constructed picture of the surrounding world. There are no and there are no guarantees against possible distortions accompanying everyday knowledge. All the more interesting are some attempts to develop at least the most general recommendations. Such an attempt was made, in particular, by E. Aronson. It may be helpful to heed his advice: be wary of those who try to construct categories for you; use different methods of categorization (consider the phenomenon from different angles); pay sufficient attention to the individual characteristics of people and phenomena; The main thing is to be aware that you are not guaranteed against making mistakes.

All the complex modifications that the process of social categorization undergoes are associated with another very peculiar cognitive process - heuristics.

1.2. Heuristics

In contrast to the philosophical tradition of using this term, in the psychology of social cognition it denotes a shortcut or a rule of arbitrariness that we use in order to make a judgment for which we have insufficient or uncertain information.

Instead of comprehensively thinking about the perceived object, establishing all its connections and relationships, processing all available information, heuristics are used to make a quick decision based on an arbitrarily formulated Rule. Heuristics represent such a “simplified decision rule”. A set of such rules is a kind of set of principles on the basis of which various subjective inclusions arise in the process of mastering social information. In other words, heuristics do not pretend to obtain knowledge based on the norms of logic, but it provides some compromise between rational and cognitively “economical” conclusion. It is a kind of set of principles on the basis of which various subjective inclusions arise in the process of mastering social information.

Ultimately, heuristics interpreted in this way are very close to psychology, the main core of reasoning of which is built on the principle: “in general, this should be so, but I think that it is not so.” Heuristics recommend obtaining the missing information bit by bit. However, when these crumbs are extremely insignificant, it nevertheless “encourages” a person to dare to draw a conclusion or to make some kind of judgment. In a certain sense, the proposals of heuristics correspond to the idea of ​​“correspondence inference” considered in theories of attributional processes. True, it was recommended to build a conclusion (“inference”) based on the correspondence of consequences to causes; here a slightly different emphasis is placed.

A. Tversky And D. Kanneman differentiate "representation heuristic" and the “availability (availability) heuristic”. In the first case, we are talking about the fact that a person tends to view some facts as more broadly presented than they actually are. The following everyday example is given: students were offered two different tests to identify their level of intelligence, one of which lasted an hour, and the other ten minutes. When asked which test was more reliable, most said the one-hour test. This answer is based on the common belief that a longer test is more serious and therefore more reliable. Thus, information about the wider representation of a phenomenon makes it easier to categorize it, based precisely on this property. At the same time, “broader representation” may not necessarily mean a truly wider distribution of a particular phenomenon, but also a more widespread opinion about something, as was the case with the assessment of a “longer” psychological test.

This strategy often leads to a completely unfounded judgment. In the example D. Myers this can be seen very clearly: a description is given of a certain Linda, who is 31 years old, a philosopher by profession, and actively interested in social problems. You are asked to answer: is she a cashier or a cashier and a feminist activist at the time? Most often they choose the second answer, since they believe that interest in social problems more likely from a feminist than from just a cashier. In reality, this answer is by no means unconditional. Let us recall in this regard the example of R. Nisbet and L. Ross: they tell their students that they have a mutual friend who likes to write poetry, is shy and short. Students are asked: who do they think this friend is - a psychologist or an expert on China? Most people answer that the friend is a psychologist, although, generally speaking, the qualities mentioned can equally be attributed to a specialist on China. The answer “psychologist” is due to the fact that for students it seems more likely that the friend of the two psychology professors is also a psychologist, and not a specialist on China. The greater “representation” of an event here acts as a greater probability of it in a given situation.

E. Aronson cites numerous everyday situations in which the representation heuristic “works” quite reliably. A child in a store reaches for a sweet that has a more beautiful picture on the packaging, because usually such sweets are more delicious; It is traditionally believed that handsome men and women are more successful, well-dressed people deserve more respect, etc. Aronson rightly criticizes numerous “how to succeed” guides for the fact that all their recommendations are based on such heuristics.

Cash heuristic, or accessibility, deals with the tendency to evaluate phenomena on the basis of ready-made judgments that are in our memory and most easily come to mind when formulating an assessment (therefore, the authors of the term even propose another formulation - “evaluation heuristics”). The accessibility of the assessment is due to the fact that it seems self-evident; a person has it “available.” The event that is being evaluated is easy to imagine: it is vivid, familiar, and easy to remember. Suppose a person is asked the question: “Do you think musicians are rich or poor people?” If the answerer is a regular attendee of noisy and fashionable rock concerts, he is inclined to answer “rich.” If his experience of communicating with musicians contains information about their difficulties, about unemployment among people in their profession, he answers: “the poor.” In reality, neither one nor the other answer is obviously correct, and the categorization is accordingly erroneous. Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in the middle, which could be the result of more careful thinking, but the "cash heuristic" simply precludes such a procedure.

In addition to the described types of heuristics, some authors name others. So, E. Aronson talks about attitude heuristics, when a judgment is made on the basis of a previously established attitude; K. Fiedler calls simulation heuristics, the essence of which is that the ease with which an event arises in memory or imagination leads to an overestimation of the significance of this event in the direction of its intensification: for example, the latest road accident exacerbates the sense of risk when assessing any driver who has consumed alcohol for driving, in the event that you “mentally simulate” a terrible picture of the latest incident.

The use of heuristics greatly “makes life easier” for the cognitive person, allows him to apply a “shortened” strategy, but at the same time it limits the amount of information that would be possible in principle. When using any heuristic, a significant part of the information is simply lost. But nevertheless, this is exactly what happens So in the process of learning about everyday reality an ordinary person. The psychology of social cognition simply states this fact.

Of course, the use of heuristics is not an absolutely obligatory norm of social cognition: only certain circumstances provoke the use of these techniques. Numerous experiments have established the most typical conditions for the use of heuristics: 1) lack of time to think about the situation; 2) information overload, making it difficult to process it; 3) the relatively low significance of the perceived object, making accurate knowledge about it quite indifferent; 4) simply insufficient information for

meaningful conclusion; 5) involuntary quick decision.

Nevertheless, the very fact that heuristics can be used in the process of social cognition cannot be disputed, and this is a truly essential feature of social categorization. To what extent this feature depends on the individual characteristics of a person (we should not forget that he is characterized by “cognitive laziness”!), and to what extent it is determined by other circumstances, requires clarification.

2. MAIN STAGES OF COGNITIVE WORK

More These and other difficulties of social categorization are revealed in detail when analyzing the main stages of working with social information, which include: attention, encoding, storage,

Rice. eleven. Stages of working with social information

playback When analyzing these stages, as well as in all the above reasoning, we have in mind some individual human characteristics that manifest themselves when working with social information. The psychology of social cognition is not limited only to the characteristics of such features: a significant layer of its reasoning concerns precisely social determinants of this process. But before we begin to identify their role, a fairly thorough analysis of the individual characteristics of a person in his work with social information is proposed. The stages of this work are highlighted precisely in this vein, which will subsequently be used by opponents as a basis for criticizing the lack of attention to purely social aspects of cognition (Fig. 11).

Attention to certain manifestations of the social world has its function to help a person evaluate his social environment, select some significant stimuli, since it is impossible to perceive all of them; it is necessary to select those objects that are relevant to the given situation. To make such a choice means to focus attention on something specific, which is needed in the future to build a system of conclusions and expectations regarding each specific social object.

Coding There is such work with information when a certain meaning is recognized in it. This is possible provided that the information is somehow organized: only in this way the edges of meaning are highlighted. In addition, such organization will facilitate the memorization of information.

Storage information involves searching for the best methods, designed to ensure that right time the information will be successfully reproduced, i.e. appreciated.

Playback social information is an extremely important stage of the entire process, since it is it that connects the cognitive process with behavior, with the actual action of a person. Adequate reproduction of information involves retrieving it from the storage system at the right time and in the right volume.

It is clear that all these stages do not exist in isolation from each other, they form an integrated system.

In this system, as can be seen in the diagram above, there are two “flows”: 1) from attention to encoding, storage and reproduction; 2) from reproduction to storage, encoding and attention. Those. Each subsequent stage provides a new “round” of working with information. Now it is necessary to consider what “happens” to social information at each stage, in particular, what distortions specific to social information may arise at each stage.

Today, motivation is one of the key market technologies. Errors in personnel motivation can cause many problems associated with financial losses. They can turn any work process into a waste of time, which will also lead to a decrease in competitiveness, and often even to the collapse of the company. How to prevent this, read below.

Major mistakes in staff motivation that can ruin a business

Mistake No. 1. Complete lack of staff motivation

Some modern managers believe that the productivity of an enterprise depends solely on the level of qualifications of employees. They do not recognize the fact that the success of work activity consists of the totality of a specialist’s knowledge and his desire to work. This thesis is especially important to understand if the company’s management aims to improve the level of customer service, develop and consolidate business relationships with them.

Best article of the month

If you do everything yourself, employees will not learn how to work. Subordinates will not immediately cope with the tasks that you delegate, but without delegation you are doomed to time trouble.

We have published in this article a delegation algorithm that will help you free yourself from routine and stop working around the clock. You will learn who can and cannot be entrusted with work, how to correctly assign a task so that it is completed, and how to supervise staff.

Today we live in a completely different time and a different society. If earlier the economy had an industrial character, then at the present stage it has acquired service features. Developed countries today produce about 80% of gross national product, selling services. At the same time, the vast majority of working citizens are employed in this area. The service economy has a number of features, the main one of which is the establishment of contact between the client and the company employee. Along with the economy, the requirements for workers and working conditions have changed. The main difference between employees of a standard organization and service workers is that the latter's responsibilities include the ability to accept independent decisions in any situation.

It is impossible to force a person to competently perform the duties of a service employee. Even the most detailed instructions will not help you foresee all possible conflict situations that an employee in this field may find himself in during a conversation with a client. To protect the company from such cases, it is necessary to know the mistakes in personnel motivation and not allow them in your work. High motivation is the key to quality customer service.

Today, the so-called knowledge workers are gaining popularity in the economic environment. This is a category of hired employees who help various companies increase their competitiveness. Knowledge workers are able to create new value using their own knowledge base, rather than material wealth. In more detail, this category of workers relies entirely on themselves and their capabilities without the participation of material factors of production.

Of course, with the arrival of knowledgeable employees, the system of relations between management and staff changes. Knowledge workers are more likely to be partners of the company than its employees, since relations with management reach the level of partnership. A knowledgeable specialist knows his worth and will not work in a company where he is not satisfied with many things. Therefore, to retain such an employee, it is necessary to avoid mistakes in motivating staff in order to achieve a high level of productivity from him.

Mistake No. 2. Misunderstanding the essence of motivation as such

At the present stage of economic development, it is already difficult to imagine a business without the participation of motive and motivation. However, in order to avoid making mistakes, it is necessary to be able to correctly understand these terms. Sometimes this is quite difficult - even among psychologists there are still disagreements in deciphering the concepts of “motive” and “motivation”. Speaking in simple language, motive is an incentive to perform any activity or a reason for committing a certain act.

It seems that everything is quite clear and precise, but let’s look at one example. Training - the leader asked one of the listeners to stand up, after which he invited him to sit back down. After completing these actions, the participant was asked what was the motive for performing them. Above, we deciphered the concept of “motive” as an internal motivation, but more than half of the training participants named the manager’s request as a motive. After this, the trainer reminded the participants that a motive is precisely an internal urge to action and the person participating in the experiment could decide for himself whether to get up or not, sit down or remain motionless. Then the training participants ventured to speculate about some of the motives for what had been done:

• showing respect to the coach;
• diligence;
• desire to take an active part in the training;
• ordinary curiosity, etc.

The first answer is erroneous, since the motive for a person’s actions takes into account only external circumstances regarding the personality of the participant. In this case we are talking about the request of the manager. Often, it is the first version of the motif that is mistakenly taken as the basis. This is where errors arise in motivating personnel at an enterprise.

Motivation is also not always understood correctly. This term has several definitions. In order to avoid mistakes in motivating staff, it is necessary to understand that proper motivation helps to form in employees a set of motives for effective work. With the help of motivation, the leader influences the team, due to which employees develop a desire for results, and not just for carrying out work activities. In order to avoid mistakes in motivating staff, it is also important to realize that each employee is individual, as is the situation in which this process occurs. Any enterprise has its own organizational procedures, conditions for receiving wages - all this and many other features must be taken into account when motivating staff.

Let's say your future employee is already familiar with the organizational intricacies of work. All that remains is to motivate him correctly. Above, we have already discussed one of the mistakes in staff motivation, based on external pressure. As a rule, such “motivation” does not end well, since it only contains a small salary, clear work regulations, full control and constant pressure from management. This method of influence abolishes organizational loyalty and “kills” the employee’s individuality and ability to think creatively. Ultimately, the company's competitiveness decreases.

Mistake No. 3. Motivate only with money

As difficult as it may be to guess, we will talk about a mistake in motivating staff based solely on money. Of course, the material component has a right to exist, but you should not put it in first place. Many company executives, in response to this question, begin to talk about various cash bonuses and huge salaries for employees.

Of course, money (especially in modern world) are an excellent incentive for carrying out a particular work activity. Material goods today have a much higher value compared to the Soviet period. People of our time can finally earn “real” money. However, it is not always and not everywhere that you can meet a person who will be satisfied with his salary. Psychologists believe that money gives rise to so-called insatiability in a person. This characteristic indicates the presence of both pros and cons of monetary motivation. Finance can play the role of an effective motivational tool, but at the same time it can become a mistake in motivating staff.

Scientists have long found out that money is a bad motivation. An American comedian once expressed himself on the same topic: “For money you can, of course, buy a charming dog. But there’s no way they’ll make him wag his tail happily.”

Obviously, a low salary may well become a reason to hate your job, but material wealth also does not guarantee complete satisfaction. This situation is well known to those who work on the salary side. People who work for a salary, as a rule, rejoice at a promotion: in addition to a monetary increase, it is also a way to express gratitude for work achievements. However, such “tides” of joy quickly disappear if a person does not receive satisfaction from the work process itself.

Also, psychologists have found that an employee quickly gets used to a financial increase. The mistake in motivating staff through bonuses, bonuses and various types of allowances also lies in the rapid loss of incentive, that is, the earnings that just yesterday were a good motivator, today no longer seem like such a big amount. As wages increase, employee expectations also rise.

Mistake No. 4. Considering staff motivation separately from management

This is another mistake, which consists in transferring the administration’s responsibilities to motivate employees to the personnel departments or HR structures of the company. It turns out that the management of the enterprise lies on the shoulders of the management, and the motivation of the staff is carried out by completely different structures.

This error also has a theoretical premise, which consists in the incorrect separation of two interacting disciplines: management and personnel management, or management and personnel management.

Such a division is completely incomprehensible to any leader who really seeks to resolve an issue related to management. What else is the head of a company needed for, if not to distribute the responsibilities of each of the workers, determine deadlines, working conditions, and properly motivate staff? As a rule, it is management that is responsible for monitoring the correctness and efficiency of work at the enterprise. Often, the size of the salary of each employee depends on the management, since it is he who decides who to punish or reward for their labor merits. All these elements are integral parts of competent employee motivation. In order not to make mistakes in motivating staff, it is also important to understand that about 80% of the responsibilities associated with this process are assigned to the head of the company. Therefore, this position must be filled by a person with a stable psyche and nerves of steel.

If management does most of the work, then what are ordinary workers needed for? Everything is very simple: their responsibilities are to lay the foundations for labor motivation during the selection of candidates for a particular position, preparing specialists through training and getting used to a new place of work. In other words, HR services are developing a career development plan for a new employee. They also organize a motivating corporate environment for the company, study the degree of employee loyalty and develop measures to increase its level, etc.

Mistake No. 5. Negligent attitude towards the staff motivation system

• Self-removal of the leader

Another mistake in motivating staff is the absence of the manager himself, that is, the boss is so busy that he wants to motivate his employees at an automated level. Unfortunately, this process is not only ineffective, it is impossible. The presence of the manager is mandatory, since it is the main part of competent staff motivation.

In order to avoid mistakes in motivating staff, the manager himself must be interested in the effectiveness of the work process. Motivation is contagious. The more motivated the manager, the more motivated the staff.

• Underestimating the importance of staff loyalty

Errors in personnel motivation may result from underestimating the organizational loyalty of employees. The organization of a motivation system begins with the attitude of employees towards the company. If employees do not like the company, you don’t even have to try to encourage them to work effectively.

Staff loyalty consists of three main principles:

• satisfaction with the place of work and working conditions;
• fair relations with the enterprise;
• trust in the leader and the company in general.

Trust is formed from the manager’s attitude towards the staff, his organizational and leadership qualities, and the level of integrity. It turns out that the enterprise must be led by a person with high moral values. Otherwise, a boss who is not familiar with ethical standards can make a lot of mistakes in motivating staff.

At the present stage of business development, there are several effective techniques for measuring the degree of staff loyalty in order to detect factors influencing its decline. These methods will help not only to form, but also to raise the current level of loyalty to the required level. All this will help increase the efficiency of work without making mistakes in motivating staff.

• Copying someone else's motivation system

To avoid mistakes in motivating staff, you can rely on successful experience other enterprises in this area. However, this does not mean that you need to blindly copy other people's methods. There are as many individual organizational systems of labor motivation as there are companies. Each company has its own history, working conditions, unique leadership characteristics, etc. Therefore, the personnel motivation system should be developed specifically for each company, taking into account its characteristics.

• Unsystematic nature of the “motivation system”

Errors in personnel motivation also arise due to the lack of a motivation system as such. It must affect every level of work organization to be truly effective. Each of the elements is complementary.

As practice shows, company managers are often faced with the disconnection of seemingly indivisible parts of the overall motivation system. Sometimes they even contradict each other. For example, at the stage of professional selection, a candidate is studied from the point of view of an individual motivator. In other words, each candidate must answer the question: “What attracts him to this position?” However, this information rarely reaches the company’s management, which subsequently becomes one of the reasons for errors in personnel motivation.

l>

No less serious mistakes in material motivation of personnel

• Does not take into account labor market trends

In order to avoid mistakes in personnel motivation, when organizing its system, the manager and HR specialists must know the following:

• Among job seekers, the question of indicators that affect the results of work and influence the calculation of various bonuses has already become firmly established.
• The variable part of wages is now widely used in remuneration of employees of auxiliary departments, say, accounting, legal services, administrative departments, etc. Previously, remuneration of employees of auxiliary departments had exclusively a salary part. At the present stage of business economics, it is increasingly common bonus system salary calculations even for employees of this category. For example, a chief accountant will receive a bonus for a long period of absence of tax penalties, a lawyer can be “rewarded” for competently drafting contracts of various types, etc.
• However, there is still no clear system for the distribution of bonus and salary parts of salaries. As practice shows, employees of the main division, who are responsible for the level of sales, have a much larger bonus portion than the personnel of auxiliary divisions.
• Do not take into account the stages of company development

Errors in personnel motivation can result from the calculation of wages in the form of salaries and bonuses at further stages of the organization’s development, that is, after the company has passed the formation stage. This was the case in one organization engaged in the sale of expensive furniture made of natural wood. Managers working there received a salary in the form of a small salary and a percentage of sales. Even though it is quite difficult to advertise expensive furniture so that a deal takes place here and now, the managers were well paid due to the existing margin difference. A few years later, with the acquisition of a base of loyal customers and the achievement of stability in sales, the desire to grow the company decreased. However, managers' salaries still consisted of salary and interest. Conclusion - the company overpaid managers for work done long ago. When management realized this, they canceled the bonuses. This error in staff motivation led to the loss of valuable personnel.

If your company needs to develop a client base, then it is better to pay managers a salary consisting of a gradually decreasing salary and a constantly growing bonus part. If your company has achieved the necessary stability, you should pay attention to supporting sales and retention of highly qualified employees. In order to avoid mistakes in motivating staff, in this case it is necessary to calculate wages by increasing the salary and reducing the size of the bonus part.

• Implement a personnel motivation system without taking into account the financial condition of the enterprise

The head of a travel agency decided to reward employees additional bonuses. However, it turned out that its accrual coincided with the payment of taxes on land for the construction of the organization and on a bank loan for the rental of the land plot itself. The management had to not only deprive the company’s employees of the promised bonuses, but also pay their salaries with a delay. As a result, only one employee and the manager remained in the company.

This situation teaches us not to make mistakes in motivating staff. Since you, as a manager, have decided to reward your employees with bonuses, consult your finance director. If it turns out that the company does not have the required quantity Money, it is better to agree with the HR manager on the development of a system of non-material labor motivation.

• Focus on average salaries in the region

The formation of a payroll system can also be influenced by regional and industry characteristics, the scale of the company, the market of competitors and the time of existence of the organization itself. A mistake in motivating staff in many companies is focusing on the average salary in the region. As a rule, such organizations operate primitive labor motivation systems. If you want to attract as many valuable personnel as possible, it is important not only to focus on average regional wages, but also to offer a little more than competing companies. Or create a specific scheme to help retain valuable employees for a certain period.

An example from life. A regional timber industry enterprise, located far from the regional center and paying small salaries to employees, organized a competition for a position as a programmer to service accounting programs. The trick was an apartment purchased in advance by the organization for 2 million rubles, which (according to the agreement) will become the property of the employee after three years of work from the date of installation.

• Be based only on your own ideas about the motivation system, without taking into account the opinions of staff

In order to avoid mistakes in motivating staff, before updating the remuneration system, you should pay attention to personnel changes and the mood of the work team. Often, firms limit themselves to conducting small tests or surveys. But as practice shows, these methods are sometimes not enough. For example, one organization offered an employee, as a non-material bonus to his salary, to drive a car with the company’s symbols. The employee did not want to drive a car with advertising. The mistake in motivation here turned out to be complete disregard by management of the real needs of the specialist.

• Implement new system staff motivation and nothing to explain

Will the new labor motivation system be successful or will it become another mistake? It all depends on its acceptance by the team. To avoid unwanted incidents, it is better to notify employees in advance about the upcoming changes and explain the purpose for which they will be made. In addition, it is necessary to ensure that employees are aware of the payment scheme for their work and their colleagues. This way you can avoid false rumors arising.

It is better to calculate salaries for department heads and their deputies strictly individually. The basis should be the employees’ understanding of what exactly influenced the salary and bonus part, so that in the future they can “manage” the size of their own wages. There are companies in which general directors entrust employees in management positions with organizing the remuneration system. Of course, such responsibilities are assigned to employees who have worked enough time at the enterprise to earn trust. In addition, this must be an employee with certain knowledge in the field of phased business development.

• There is no transition from the old motivation system to the new one

Another mistake in staff motivation faced by the management of one regional company led to the company losing most of its total number of sales employees. Everything happened after the bonus was awarded. It was decided to increase the sales plan and, at the beginning of the next month, introduce a new remuneration system that corresponds to the adopted plan. As a result, we got another mistake in motivating staff: the size of bonuses remained the same, but the level of sales increased significantly.

To ensure that errors in staff motivation do not cause mass layoffs from your enterprise, adhere to the following: make changes to the remuneration system only if production indicators improve.

Expert opinion

We first calculated everything, studied it, and then offered

Alexander Dmitriev,

CEO JSC "Penza Valve Plant"

In order to prevent errors in personnel motivation, our plant studied the remuneration systems at competing enterprises in the Penza region. Based on the monitoring results, innovations were introduced in the form of bonuses to the basic salary and increasing coefficients. Plant employees whose specialties are classified as core at our enterprise were provided with a 20-25% increase in wages compared to competitors.

The social program of the Penza Reinforcement Plant is confirmed by a collective agreement and contains the following:

• Partial and full payment of wages to our employees and their children who require medical care, a trip to health camps or sanatoriums.
• Return of funds from the factory canteen, used as subsidies for food for the company's employees.
• Providing cash assistance labor veterans and pensioners of the enterprise.
• Providing partial financial support for funeral services.
• Financial benefits for employees whose children became first-graders.
• One-time payments to employees of the enterprise who have reached the age of 50 years.
• Providing financial assistance to employees who need medical services to improve their health (accrued strictly in the absence of claims to the performance of job duties according to the job description in the order of going on regular leave).

Expert opinion

Every employee must clearly know what they are paid for

Valentin Karpunin,

General Director of Kargopol Milk LLC, Arkhangelsk Region

Each employee has individual character traits and varying levels of performance. Therefore, in order to avoid making mistakes in motivating staff, a real manager must be able to create conditions at the enterprise for a comfortable stay for workers (for example, a separate place for a smoke break, showers, locker rooms, etc.), as well as competent system wages, according to which each employee will be able to understand why exactly he received this amount. The likelihood of errors in personnel motivation will be significantly reduced if an enterprise employee receives a salary worthy of his level of performance. Then the staff will try to work better.

All of the above at Kargopol Moloko LLC is recorded in the official collective agreement, which led to the achievement of certain results. This document was created through the efforts of the entire working team, including the staff themselves, trade union members and management. The collective agreement contains the following: the amount of wages for each position, the terms of payment of wages. A system of sanctions and fines in cases of various types of violations is also spelled out here.

Thus, we were able to significantly reduce the risk of making mistakes in motivating staff, since each employee can independently “track” the process of receiving wages, its size, the amount of bonuses and bonuses, etc. In addition, thanks to the collective agreement, you can find out who did the work or other work, to which the maximum attention of management will be paid when calculating wages and much more.

How to correct mistakes in motivating company personnel

1. You didn’t clearly explain what you ultimately want to get from the employee, for which he will be rewarded.

It’s one thing to make a mistake in motivating staff, and quite another to try to correct it. At first glance, the requirements for an employee are the same: discipline, activity, responsibility, etc. However, it is worth asking a question that requires a clear answer, for example: “What exactly needs to be redone?” or “What exactly doesn’t suit us?”

How to avoid making mistakes? When a company is looking for new employees, it sets in advance the “parameters” of a candidate for a particular position. In this case, the characteristics must be real so that no problems arise during the search. If you make a mistake, you will only have yourself to blame. Once expectations have been set, it is necessary to make it clear to the employee what exactly is required of him. It’s good if he agrees and everything is recorded in writing, because if any violations occur during the work process, you will have something to refer to to prove your innocence. The list of expectations may change slightly over time. This is considered the norm. The only thing is that each requirement must be clear and understandable. For example: “A report on the work done for each month must be submitted to the secretary no later than the 5th day of the month following the reporting month.” In this situation, the likelihood of making a mistake in motivating staff is low.

How to fix the error? If an employee has been working for a long time and already has several dozen violations on his record, it means that an error was initially made in motivating the staff. It will be much more difficult to fix it, but don’t despair. As they say: “Everything impossible is possible.”

Consider the situation with an employee who is used to wearing wrinkled trousers and a T-shirt to work. Your goal is to force him to wear a suit. First, just let him know what you want from him. Secondly, give it time to get used to it. Let's say a week. Perhaps the employee will ask why such innovations are needed, after which a week of getting used to will follow. The employee will probably think this is some kind of joke. However, as soon as he gets used to the new requirements, two possible results will follow: submission or sabotage. In the case of subordination, do not make mistakes when you think about how to reward an employee. He will probably be pleased to hear a flattering review of the new suit from his manager. Try to do this with all sincerity. If an employee decides to sabotage, adhere to the following scheme: statement of dissatisfaction, then strong dissatisfaction, punishment and, if necessary, dismissal. It’s another matter if an employee receives a low salary and is the sole breadwinner of the family - provide him with a suit at the expense of the company. After all, it is you who want to see him wearing it at work.

2. Rewarded for wrong actions.

You can make a mistake in motivating staff by encouraging the wrong actions. As the saying goes, “what you reward is what you get.” For example, the case of a pet. You decide to have lunch, but your pet (dog or cat) starts making eyes at you to get a piece from your plate. However, once you give in to him, this situation will be repeated constantly, making it clearer and clearer to your pet that he can demand larger pieces. And it's all your fault. It would seem that you committed a noble deed, but it turned against you. Now your pet knows that he can beg for food at the table - it’s unlikely that you wanted this. This example It also illustrates well the mistakes in staff motivation related to incentives.

How to avoid making mistakes? In order to avoid mistakes in motivating staff, you must first of all clearly decide for yourself what your employees can and cannot do in the workplace. At the same time, you must be able to quickly respond to various types of violations during the work process.

How to fix the error? If mistakes were nevertheless made in motivating staff, and you unknowingly “awarded” the employee with an undeserved bonus, then remember this incident for the future so as not to find yourself in such a situation again. It would be even better to talk about what happened with the offending employee so that he also understands his mistake and does not repeat it again.

3. Inaction was encouraged.

Sometimes mistakes in motivating staff can also involve encouraging employee inaction. As a rule, this is an employee with a high level of productivity, but, for example, with a habit of constantly being late. And the boss, instead of reprimanding him, continues to award him bonuses for a job well done. Such delicacy from management can lead to the employee starting to be systematically late, thinking that he has an “individual” schedule. In addition, such an oversight by the director is a mistake in motivating the company’s personnel, since the rest begin to think that they are allowed to do this too. As a result, discipline in the company will be violated.

You can continue your inaction, believing that discipline in the organization is secondary. However, if for you it is one of the factors of successful business, then you are unknowingly rewarding what should be punished.

How to avoid making mistakes? You are a leader - don't forget that. Don’t be shy about reacting appropriately to certain violations by employees. However, it is the act that should be condemned, not the offender himself. Remember: scolded once, praised twice.

How to fix the error? However, if your subordinates are not accustomed to receiving “cuffs” for violations, this is already a mistake in staff motivation and its abrupt correction will lead to even worse consequences. Don't go from one extreme to the other. Act wisely. Let's say you decide to prohibit employees from smoking during working hours. So finish what you started, following step by step. If you stop halfway, you risk your reputation. And vice versa, if you achieve your plan, you will increase your authority.

4. They were not rewarded for doing the right thing.

As a rule, managers who consider it unreasonable to reward employees for doing the right thing make mistakes in motivating staff. It turns out that the company has established football rules: if you play well, you get nothing, but if you make a mistake, you get a free kick or a card. Ultimately, all motivation lies only in corporate parties once a year and deprivation of bonuses for violating the rules. And then the bosses sit and wonder: why is productivity at the enterprise so low?

How to avoid making mistakes? The trick is that future football team players receive their reward for good play in childhood. With age, everything develops into a conditioned reflex. Although violations of the rules occur, this is done with caution. After all, the players understand that if something happens they will receive a free kick. The situation is different with the working personnel. Keeping employees on the mere fear of getting a fine is an unfortunate mistake in motivating staff. It is one thing to achieve the absence of violations and quite another to create the will to win. Of course, you should no longer constantly praise an employee for always doing everything on time. However, rewarding him for his success in public work is a completely different matter. In addition to the fact that this will cause a lot of pleasant emotions in a person, this situation will serve as a clear example for other employees.

How to fix the error? If you are not the kind of manager who considers it necessary to periodically thank your employees, then it will not be so easy for you to acquire such a habit. Start gradually. Let's say, identify for yourself a couple of employees with whom you have established relationships. They will be your workout. Then, as in a game, increase the difficulty level. Believe me, it will be pleasant not only for your employees, but also for you. By periodically praising your employees, you yourself do not notice how you motivate them to work effectively. The advantage of such motivation is that it does not require additional costs. In addition, this is an excellent prevention of mistakes in motivating staff.

5. The method and form of encouragement were chosen incorrectly.

However, rewards may not always have a positive result. Sometimes it turns into a mistake in staff motivation, which caused a negative reaction from employees.

Let's look at the following case as an example. The head of a large construction company in Moscow decided to give each of the department heads an iPhone as a reward for good work. However, as it turned out later, everyone already has their own smartphones, half of the workers even have the same bitten apple on the back panel. This error in staff motivation also led to the fact that managers, whose departments could boast of much better results over the past year, were offended when they received the same gift as their “less successful” colleagues. It turns out that such “encouragement” brought nothing but harm.

How to avoid making mistakes? Remember the Soviet film “The Adventures of Electronics”, the hero of which shouts: “Uriy-Uriy! Where is his button?!” Therefore, remember that each of the employees has that same “button”. There are as many different motivational approaches as there are employees in an enterprise. What works effectively for one person may not work for another at all. To avoid mistakes in motivating staff, you, as a manager, need to find out what each of your subordinates is interested in. This is the only way you can truly inspire your team to work effectively. To do this, simply ask each of your subordinates directly what interests them.

How to fix the error? If a mistake in motivating staff has already been made, then it is best to admit to yourself that you made a mistake and will not repeat it again. Don't try to accuse your subordinates of ingratitude. It is also not worth taking away what was given. Know how to replay unpleasant situations as a joke in order to quickly get rid of accumulated negativity.

Expert opinion

Twice a year we discuss with employees their personal development plans

Anna Bugrimenko,

Head of HR Department, NFC

To avoid mistakes in motivating staff, it is necessary to have a consistent opinion on making decisions on each issue that arises. This is the case, for example, in Scandinavian companies, where the final decision comes from a collective discussion among stakeholders, taking into account the individual needs of each subordinate. Our company can also boast of the practice of working groups and collegial management bodies in various areas, from risk management to charity.

We also hold two formal events every year. Firstly, the so-called, to learn about the company’s mistakes through the eyes of management and employees, as well as to receive an anonymous assessment of the company’s overall work process. Secondly, the development of an individual enterprise development plan.

Of course there is certain connection between these two events. As a rule, a manager collects information from each employee, discusses it with management, and analyzes the company’s “blind spots.” As a result, it determines the strengths and weak sides organization and plans further work process.

Information about experts

Alexander Dmitriev, General Director of JSC Penza Reinforcement Plant. OJSC "Penza Valve Plant" produces and designs taps, valves and valves (including pneumatic and electric drives), shut-off devices, steam traps, plumbing fittings for the petrochemical, nuclear, food industries, boiler and shipbuilding, heating and gas networks - and water supply. The manufactured fittings are certified by the State Standard of the Russian Federation. The quality management system is certified according to the international standard ISO 9001:2000. The total number of employees is 850 people (workers - 600 people). Annual turnover - 350 million rubles.

Valentin Karpunin, General Director of Kargopol Milk LLC, Arkhangelsk region. The Kargopol Milk Dairy Plant has been operating for over 80 years. Today the number of employees of the enterprise is 70 people.

Anna Bugrimenko, Head of HR Department, NFC. Graduated from the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosova; candidate of psychological sciences, graduate of the Presidential program for retraining management personnel with a degree in commerce management. Since 2007, he has been working at NFC as Head of the Human Resources Department. NFC specializes in factoring and financial logistics. The company was founded in 1999. Member of the international factoring association IFG (International Factors Group).

Motivational mistakes

Parameter name	Meaning
Article topic:	Motivational mistakes
Rubric (thematic category)	Psychology

Errors of this kind are represented by various “defenses,” biases that the subject of the attributional process includes in his actions. The very idea of ​​including motivation in attribution arose already during the first studies of this process. Although consideration of the fundamental attribution error is usually given priority, in reality the emphasis on motivational errors is no less important. The history of appealing to motivationally determined

biases that manifest themselves in attributional processes. Initially, these errors were identified in situations where subjects sought to maintain their self-esteem while attributing reasons for another person's behavior. The magnitude of self-esteem depended to a large extent on whether one attributed it to oneself or to another. successes or failures.

A human tendency was identified to see oneself in a more positive light than would be guaranteed by an impartial position. However, sufficient experimental data was not obtained to confirm this trend, and for some time interest in motivational errors was lost. the fundamental error became the focus of researchers' interest. But as soon as the fear began to arise that the entire problematic of attributive processes was overly exaggerating the role of rational components in the perception of social objects, a new round of interest emerged both in the problems of motivation of social cognition in general, and in motivational attribution errors in particular.

Although cognitive schemes assume that every “naive observer” essentially acts as a “non-professional scientist”, ᴛ.ᴇ. more or less rationally, at the same time, in reality there is a more “warm” picture of the attributional process. It includes the so-called “hot cognitions,” which has already been proven by psychology. The secret of this “coloring” of cognition in warmer tones, apparently, must be sought in motivation.

In general terms, the extreme importance of including motivation in the attributional process is due to the recognition of the fact subjective human interpretation of social reality. It is these subjective interpretations, which inevitably include bias, that lead to important consequences for the further motivation of behavior. However, the opposite is also true: the motivation of behavior largely determines the mechanism by which biased judgments arise. An example of such a mechanism is the occurrence of a motivational attribution error.

Significant development of this problem belongs to B. Weiner. His focus is on ways of attributing causes in situations of success and failure. He proposed considering three dimensions in each cause:

internal - external;

stable - unstable;

controlled - uncontrolled.

Various combinations of these dimensions yield eight models (possible sets of causes):

1) internal - stable - uncontrolled;

2) internal - stable - controlled;

3) internal - unstable - uncontrollable;

4) internal - unstable - controlled;

5) external - stable - uncontrolled;

6) external - stable - controlled;

7) external - unstable - uncontrollable;

8) external - unstable - controlled.

Weiner suggested that the choice of each combination is due to different motivations. This can be illustrated with the following example. The student answered the lesson poorly. In different cases, he explains his behavior differently: if he referred to low abilities in a given subject, then he chooses situation 1; if he admits that he was lazy, then perhaps he chooses situation 2; if he referred to a sudden illness before answering, then chooses situation 3; if you are distracted by watching a TV show - situation 4; if he accused the school of being too demanding, then he chooses situation 5; if the teacher is assessed as bad - then situation 6; if you are just “unlucky”, then situation 7; Finally, if a neighbor is renovating the house and constantly knocks, interfering with work, then it would be appropriate to explain this with situation 8.

As you can see, the process of explaining reasons here includes an idea of ​​the goal being achieved, in other words, it is associated with achievement motivation. A more specific connection was established by Weiner between the choice of cause and success or failure actions. This idea is illustrated by an experiment: the subject is shown a hypothetical person who was either successful or unsuccessful in some task. The difficulty of the task was designated as an “external” reason, and the person’s abilities as an “internal” reason. It has been revealed that if a person is more capable, then his success is attributed to an internal reason, and his failure is attributed to an external reason. On the contrary, for a less capable person, success is attributed to an external cause (the task is not too difficult), and failure is attributed to an internal cause (that’s just the way he is).

The same effect was also found regarding a person’s status: one type of explanation was given for a high-status person and another type for a low-status person. This has been confirmed experimentally J. Thibault And X. Rikken: “A naive subject” is presented with two “confederates” (persons in cahoots with the experimenter). One of them is dressed ceremoniously, it is said about him that he has just defended his dissertation. The other is dressed shabbily and is said to be a first-year student. The experimenter gives the “naive subject” the task of making a speech in favor of blood donation and convincing two “Confederates” to immediately donate blood as donors. The “Confederates” listen to the speech and soon report that they are convinced and are going to donate blood. Then the experimenter asks the “naive” person to explain why they do this? The answer is different in two cases: the “naive” one believes that the person who defended the dissertation is apparently a highly conscious citizen and made such a decision himself, while the first-year student made such a decision, of course, under the influence of “speech”, ᴛ.ᴇ. influence from the “naive” side. The locus of causality in the first case is internal, in the second - external. Obviously, such a distribution of loci is associated with the status of the perceived person.

Of the three proposed divisions of causes, the first two are better studied: the division of causes into “internal - external” and “stable - unstable”. Moreover, it is precisely manipulations with these two types of reasons that give rise to the majority of motivational errors. As we have seen, the attribution of internal or external causes depends on the status of the perceived, and in the case of evaluating one’s behavior, on self-esteem. The attribution of stable - unstable causes is especially closely related to the recognition of success - failure. If we combine all the experiments concerning the use of these two pairs of reasons, the result is clear everywhere: in case of success, internal reasons are attributed to oneself, in case of failure - external (circumstances); on the contrary, when explaining the reasons for the behavior of another, various options arise that have just been considered. Note that this dependence can vary to a certain extent in different cultural contexts, which will be discussed in more detail below.

This part of attribution research is particularly rich in experimentation. The famous experiment of S. Krantz and S. Rud was used M. I. Nikolyukina[cm. 79]. When analyzing the performance of a certain task, four “classical” factors were recorded, on which, according to Weiner, the nature of any action depends: ability, effort, task difficulty, success. Nikolukina’s experiment examined attributive processes in a study group: here there are always certain expectations regarding the success or failure of each group member in a specific type of activity. The following hypothesis has been proposed:

the successes of those who are on the success scale for this type of activity higher the subject, internal reasons are attributed, and external reasons are attributed to failure; successes of those who stand on the scale below subject, external causes are attributed, and failures- internal.

The subjects were students from several groups. Each of them ranked their fellow students according to their level of competence (success) in some subject (for example, mathematics or literature). On the constructed scale, each student indicated his place. Next, tests were carried out on the relevant subject and the test subjects were informed of the scores they received. Next, each interpreted the results of the other students. It turned out that if a person placed by me on the scale above me received a more positive assessment than me, then I attribute this to internal reasons (he was subjectively perceived by me as more successful, and the assessment corresponds to this idea). If a given student suddenly received a grade lower than “mine”, I attribute this to an external reason (he is actually stronger than me, which means that the low grade is “to blame” for some external circumstance). The reverse logic of reasoning was present when attributing the causes of success and failure to subjects located on the scale below “my” level. However, the hypothesis was completely confirmed.

Now we can summarize the consideration of attribution theories in the context of their place in the psychology of social cognition. So, the attributional process begins with the individual’s motivation to understand the causes and consequences of other people’s actions, ᴛ.ᴇ. ultimately understand the meaning of human relationships. Moreover, a person always has both the need to understand these relationships and the need to predict the further course of these relationships. Unlike theories of cognitive correspondence, in the theory of causal attribution, achieving cognitive correspondence is not a necessary and desirable result of cognitive “work”. Correspondence here is rather a criterion for understanding when a causal explanation seems sufficient. The reason that an individual attributes to a phenomenon (or person) has important consequences for himself, for his feelings and behavior. The meaning of an event and a person's reaction to it are determined to a greater extent by the attributed cause. For this reason, the very search for causes, their adequate choice in various situations is the most important condition for a person’s orientation in the social world around him.

This orientation is a very complex thought process that requires the ability to operate with the information received, as well as to “complete” it if it is insufficient. For this reason, the attributional process includes a whole series of not only cognitive, but also motivational operations, as well as taking into account the emotional components of cognition. The analysis of attributive processes is important not only in itself, but serves as an incentive for further deepening into the process of social cognition. Being a kind of forerunner of the psychology of social cognition, the study of attributive processes leaves to its share a number of unsolved problems and unexplained phenomena concerning how a person, drawing information about the world around him, builds an overall image of it in order to function successfully in it.

4. SOCIAL ATTRIBUTION

The unresolved nature of these problems is largely due to the fact that, despite interesting findings in the description of attributional processes, they remain processes inherent individual consciousness. Phenomenon related to social interaction is essentially considered outside the social context. It is no coincidence in this regard that the entire area of ​​attribution research becomes the arena of rather heated debate between the American and European traditions in social psychology. In this case, the point is that attribution studies, if they claim to be included in the psychology of social cognition, must inevitably be included in the social context.

This step was taken by a number of European authors and was embodied in “social attribution theory”, originally stated J.-C. Deschamps and the most fully developed M. Houston And J. Jaspars. They emphasize that attributive theories should consider the process of attributing causes specifically social behavior. The traditional approach focused on how individual carries out the attributional process without taking into account the individual’s membership in a particular social group. The new approach emphasizes that an individual attributes something to another on the basis of ideas about his own group, as well as on the basis of ideas about the group to which this “other” belongs. S. Moscovici, for example, argues that we always at first Let's ask which group the person belongs to, and then we begin to attribute to him the reasons for his behavior. In other words, the interpretation of the behavior and activities of another person is always carried out on the basis of his group membership.

At the same time, the attribution process also takes into account the nature interactions, formed in the group to which the subject of perception belongs. However, the number of connections that must be taken into account during the attribution process is multiplied, and thus the process moves even further away from “pure” perception and is supplemented by a whole complex of mental operations. This is an important addition proposed by the theory of social attribution and means an even greater opportunity to consider the attributional process not just as the “core” of social perception, but also as an essential component of social cognition.

At the same time, such an addition “ties” causal attribution to other mechanisms of human cognition of the social world. Since the search for causes appeals to the group affiliation of both the subject and the object of perception, their interaction includes the idea of two groups ("one's own" and "alien") and, therefore, a mechanism inevitably arises social comparison. By this, the attributional process is included in the formation of social identity and intergroup relations, and thereby in the complex context of a wide variety of social phenomena.

The main directions of criticism of traditional concepts of attribution are implemented by the authors of the idea of ​​social attribution along the following positions: a) in traditional concepts the model of the acting person is too “rational” (for example, in the theories of H. Kelly); b) as already noted, in their analysis the group of membership of both the subject and the object of the attributional process is largely ignored; c) the methodology used in traditional research is primarily a laboratory experiment, ᴛ.ᴇ. the application of its results in “real” life is limited; d) many important characteristics of the participants in the process, such as gender, age, as well as the levels of attribution described by F. Heider, are practically not taken into account.

1. Social attribution concerns everyday explanations of the causes and results of people's behavior, taking into account the social conditions in which people live.

2. Its basis is social categorization (of both the subject and the object of the attributional process).

3. It is worth saying that it is characterized by the maintenance of a positive image of its group by the perceiving subject. This is achieved by using a strategy where the success of one's group and the failure of the out-group are explained internal reasons, and the failure of one’s own group and the success of another group are reasons external.

4 Social attribution is not always based on an opinion shared by all members of the group, ᴛ.ᴇ. to stereotypes existing in the group. It can also arise on the basis of the “personal” prejudice of the perceiver.

5. At the same time, social attribution can be created or strengthened on the basis of the development of interaction with other members of the group [see. 66].

It follows from this that social attribution can be based both on stereotypical ideas about another group, and on the direct prejudice of one of the participants in the interaction; the outcome will depend on the nature of the interaction between members of different groups.

The proposed concept acquires special significance in cases where the participants in the attributional process belong to different cultures, primarily to different ethnic groups. For this reason, the idea of ​​social attribution receives detailed development in ethnopsychology. Here, in particular, the differences between representatives of different cultures in committing a fundamental attribution error, and in general the degree of “commitment” to personal (in individualistic cultures) or circumstantial (in collectivistic cultures) attribution are analyzed. Under all conditions, the “social context,” the extreme importance of which European authors insist in any socio-psychological research, is represented mainly by the membership groups of the participants in the attributional process.

It should be noted that the idea itself of the extreme importance of taking into account the group context in the attributional process was expressed by us back in 1975, when a theoretical scheme for the study of social perception was proposed [see. 114], where the emphasis was placed precisely on the fact that in any variant of perception of another person it is extremely important to take into account the group affiliation of both the subject and the object of perception. It also emphasized the idea that in general, under all circumstances of studying the socio-perceptual process (ᴛ.ᴇ. and analysis of causal attribution), the group context should be dominant. Some research results were reported in the section on the study of attributional processes, led by G. Kelly, at the International Congress of Psychology in Leipzig in 1980. . Unfortunately, as in many other cases, the further development of this idea did not gain popularity among Western colleagues (like many other ideas in Russian social psychology).

For this reason, today we often turn to the same ideas, but only in execution and in a much more complete development, in particular, by European authors [see. 103; 104].

The theory of social attribution again appeals to the fact that ideas about the social world (in this case about oneself and about groups) are formed in the course of interaction and communication between elements of the social structure. Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, and from this side the conclusion about the inseparability of the processes of social cognition, communication and behavior is confirmed. Attributional theories, especially when taking into account modern additions, become not only one of the prerequisites for the psychology of social cognition, but also its significant component.

PROCESS OF SOCIAL INFORMATION PRODUCTION

1. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

When those “additives” that transform social perception into social cognition are established, and their manifestation is described using the example of attributive processes, it becomes clear that the result of a person’s comprehension of the social objects and situations around him is the construction of a holistic image of the social world. Now, in order to study more specifically the methods of this construction, it is extremely important to answer at least three questions:

1. How do you work with information about this world? 2. What elements of the social world are highlighted? 3. What mechanisms “serve” the process of constructing the social world?

It has already been noted that the most common way of working with social information is the process categorization - assignment of each new perceived object to a certain class of similar and previously known objects, ᴛ.ᴇ. to category. “Category,” as it was emphasized, is one of the basic concepts of the concept J. Bruner and in general all of cognitive psychology, which “considers the subject’s behavior as controlled by the process of updating “categories”, or, in other terminology, “cognitive units”. By introducing cognitive units, cognitive psychology comes to the recognition of the Subjective Image in the broad epistemological sense of this concept. Naturally, problems of categorization are also considered in other systems of psychological knowledge. In particular, for social cognition the idea of ​​L. S. Vygotsky and A. N. Leontiev about the role of values in relation to the categorization process. Categorization is possible insofar as people live in a relatively stable world, where objects have more or less invariant characteristics, ᴛ.ᴇ. meanings, thanks to which a person can identify them. Categorization acts as a tool through which a person systematizes his environment, on the basis of which it is only possible to act in this environment.

For this reason, we can say that in some ways categorization is similar to the attributional process: in both cases, a person comprehends the meaning of the world around him. It is clear that identifying meaning is possible only if all newly perceived objects are considered in some context. But to perceive objects “in context” means to establish the entire system of connections of a given object with all other objects and phenomena, and this is a very complex cognitive task, and some ways to simplify it are necessary. One of the ways to simplify the cognitive strategy is categorization. Its general function is precisely the ordering and simplification of information received from the outside, which helps to understand the context. The complexity of such a strategy is that the subject of cognition does not simply “simplify” the information received, but, as Bruner puts it, is forced to “go beyond it”, to carry out significant intellectual work on further combining categories in order to obtain a holistic picture. The peculiarity of this “work” is that certain aspects of the information are selected and others modified from in order to achieve a “best match” within a category.

Despite the universality of the categorization process, a number of problems arise regarding its specific manifestation in social cognition. This can be illustrated by the example of identifying those signs, on the basis of which the categorization process is carried out.

The basis on which objects are placed in one category or another is the similarity of these objects in some way sign. According to A. G. Shmeleva,“Particularly informative cognitive features are those that differentiate alternative categories.” In other words, the differences on this basis should be less significant than the similarities. If we classify a person we meet as “old people,” this means that the differences that exist between “old people” (whether he is a man or a woman, a healthy person or a sick person) are less important to us in this case than the similarities. The person perceived in a specific situation is, first of all, an “old man”. In the same way, for example, at sports competitions for disabled people, we note, first of all, that the participants in this competition are disabled people who have overcome their illnesses or injuries and courageously joined the ranks of the competitors. Differences in the degree and nature of their disabilities have not yet been taken into account. The category “disabled people” used is based on the principle of availability common feature.

Often the boundaries of the categories used are quite clear and placing an object within them is not difficult, as was the case, for example, in the examples described. At the same time, sometimes the question of the boundaries of categories is quite complicated: these boundaries are very vague. For example, a category such as “religious people”. What should be considered their common feature: attending church or simply believing in God? This complexity manifests itself even more clearly in relation to broader categories that often characterize rather abstract social phenomena or values. Let's take the category “democrats”. In different historical situations, often in the same society, the very idea of ​​democracy is usually understood very differently in different social groups. What is the “general sign” of a democrat if we want to classify the person we meet (or not classify) as a “democrats”? The answer to this question is not so simple.

For this reason, in relation to such broad and sometimes abstract categories, a kind of fragmentation is used; they are subdivided within themselves into so-called subcategories: all well-performing students are divided into “excellent students” or “good students”, etc. A number of experiments have shown that in relation to social objects, people have formed some relatively stable priorities regarding which categories are primarily used in categorization, and which are used next. Thus, in many experiments conducted in mixed groups, subjects first classified group members by ethnicity or gender, and only then by their demonstrated ability on a task or by their contribution to the group discussion of the problem.

The next important feature of the categories is their different ʼʼcomplexityʼʼ, ᴛ.ᴇ. full of specific content: we see more common features in some categories than in others. This is especially significant when using categories of social cognition. So, for example, when we perceive people belonging to “our” group (say, ethnic), we recognize in them much more externally distinguishable features than in people of another group: it is known that for many Europeans all people with pronounced with Asian features - “looks the same.” How important this is in practical life can be seen from the example of the current situation in our country, when, due to a number of circumstances, the absurd term “person of Caucasian nationality” arose and, in the context of an increase in criminogenic phenomena, any such “person” indiscriminately begins to arouse the suspicion of law enforcement agencies, which sometimes leads to offensive actions on their part.

The classification of social objects into categories has its main function of serving a person as a guide to action: categorization shortens the path to determining the strategy of behavior, reduces this process to the shortest option. This is due to the fact that, as noted in psychosemantics, “the psychological meaning of any categorization process lies in preparing a solution. Therefore, psychologically, decision-making does not require any noticeable period of time from the subject, since the decision is already actually prepared by assigning the stimulus object to a certain category. However, the connection between perception - thinking - action is drawn. In the perception-thinking link, categorization connects how we perceive the world and how we think about it. The next part of the link - how we think about the world and how we act in it - needs to be examined especially.

Now, if we accept the idea that in the process of transition from perception to cognition we do not just mechanically add something to the process of perception, but actively add it, then it follows from it that in the course of social cognition we really “build” the social world, construct it. The picture of the social world “built” in this way may turn out to be very different. It is important to take into account all the factors that will cause such differences. The very first condition is to identify the ways in which we collect social information: do we absorb it (all or not all?), complete it, distort it, etc. In the end, here too the questions traditional for any cognitive process arise: “where to look?”, “what to listen to?”, “what to do with what we don’t need?”. The whole set of these problems is discussed in the psychology of social cognition in the section “The path of production of social information”. Actually, this term denotes the process that includes the selection of extremely important information, interpretation of its meaning, methods of storing and reproducing it at the right time.

The authors of these ideas like to give the following example.
Posted on ref.rf
Imagine yourself arriving on another planet. You encounter things there that are unknown to you - unusual shapes, unusual sounds, everything that was previously absent from your previous experience. How to find meaning in this new environment? What you can learn about this new world is limited by your sensory and cognitive abilities. To understand the situation, you must first establish what is most important to you. After this, try to formulate something about the nature of this “important”, for which you will still have to use previous knowledge about the world. Then new knowledge can be included in the context of old experience. Only after this can you try to adapt to the new. Despite the primitiveness of the plot, it clearly shows the main stages of working with incoming information. Again, these stages are present when working with any information, but in the case of social information, a special kind of distortion arises here, which is extremely important to describe in detail.

These problems are best examined in terms of the most common process of social categorization—the way in which each new person is categorized. Because many of us perceivers are “cognitive slackers,” we want to categorize immediately. The easiest way in this case is to categorize a newly met person by simply placing him in the category “person”. At the same time, we seem to be “attacking” the social stimulus that has arrived to us. This is necessary in order to somehow begin interaction with him. Then, later, you can continue the categorization, assigning the person you met to groups by gender, age, etc.

The continuation of the process of social categorization is determined by a number of factors. Most often, two such factors appear in experiments: “vitality” (brightness), which manifests itself as emotional interest in an object, and “primacy,” which, as has been repeatedly noted in earlier studies, is determined by the order in which information is presented. Thus, the proposal to categorize the objects seen in the film gave such a result that the categorization was carried out faster and more accurately in the case when the subjects viewed a color rather than a black and white film. At the same time, such motivational and emotional characteristics of the perceiver as his mood also manifested themselves quite intensively. People with a positive attitude were more easily able to decide which category to place a particular object into. In the example of watching a movie, it turned out that after a light, fun movie, categorization was carried out

more effective than after the documentary, although in both cases the same objects were shown.

As for the role of the primacy of the information presented, That according to the same principle of the “cognitive lazy person,” a person categorizes an object more easily and immediately just now presented: he simply “grabs” at what comes to mind faster. T. Higgins and G. King proposed to distinguish between two types of assessment that people use when categorizing: chronic and momentary. The latter depends to a greater extent on the momentary social context͵ ᴛ.ᴇ. from the current situation in which the categorization process has to be carried out. Thus, it was revealed that the evening student whom the subject met during classes at the university is categorized on the principle of “placing him” in some category (group) associated with the characteristics of his educational success, and not at all on the basis of his “long-term” affiliation with category with which he is associated through work in the company. “Chronic” assessment involves a longer and at the same time thorough process of assigning a person to a certain group.

Whatever additional difficulties may arise in the process of social categorization, it inevitably occurs. The question arises about the duration of this process. Apparently, it can be argued that, in contrast to the categorization of physical objects, the duration or suspension of the process of social categorization depends on how much the subject of perception interested in interaction with the perceived object. If this interest is absent, the categorization process ends:

a girl interested in meeting a young man, after categorizing him as a “married man,” may lose interest in him and, therefore, no longer continue the process of more “detailed” categorization. On the contrary, the presence of interest in continuing interaction takes the categorization process to a new level.

This stage is characterized by the fact that after “primary” categorization, we begin to identify signs in the cognizable object that in one way or another complement the category. Such signs are certain personality traits if another person is perceived. When adding new features to the category to which the subject we perceived was previously assigned, two different situations can arise: when the newly perceived features “fit” into the initial category and when they contradict it. If confirmation of the correctness of a certain category is received, the categorization process when constructing the first impression can be considered complete: the object of perception, as it seems to us, is reliably “placed” in the category. Otherwise, you have to rethink the primary categorization. This process is referred to as process recategorization: The married man I meet is categorized as a “very successful independent man” and suddenly it turns out that at home he cooks dinner himself. A whole series of assumptions are made regarding the reasons for this (the mechanism of causal attribution is turned on). Based on them, either such a feature stands out that the subject of interest to us is “under the heel of his wife,” or that he simply has the misfortune of being married “to a very busy, working woman.” In both cases, it is necessary to carry out recategorization - “transfer” the perceived person into some other category.

As you can see, on the way to implementing social categorization, a number of “threats” arise to the adequacy of the constructed picture of the surrounding world. There are no and there are no guarantees against possible distortions accompanying everyday knowledge. All the more interesting are some attempts to develop at least the most general recommendations. Such an attempt was made, in particular, by E. Aronson. It may be helpful to heed his advice: be wary of those who try to construct categories for you; use different methods of categorization (consider the phenomenon from different angles); pay sufficient attention to the individual characteristics of people and phenomena; The main thing is to be aware that you are not guaranteed against making mistakes.

All the complex modifications that the process of social categorization undergoes are associated with another very peculiar cognitive process - heuristics.

1.2. Heuristics

In contrast to the philosophical tradition of using this term, in the psychology of social cognition it denotes a shortcut or a rule of arbitrariness that we use in order to make a judgment for which we have insufficient or uncertain information.

Instead of thinking comprehensively about the perceived object, establishing all its connections and relationships, and processing all available information, heuristics are used to make a quick decision based on an arbitrarily formulated Rule. Heuristics are such a “simplified decision rule”. A set of such rules is a kind of set of principles on the basis of which various subjective inclusions arise in the process of mastering social information. In other words, heuristics do not pretend to obtain knowledge based on the norms of logic, but it provides some compromise between rational and cognitively “economical” conclusion. It is a kind of set of principles on the basis of which various

Motivational errors - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Motivational errors" 2017, 2018.

What are the basic principles and approaches to increasing the motivation of employees in an organization? What methods are used to increase motivation? What are the mistakes when developing a motivation system?

Be a leader at top level It's not that simple. The production commander, who only gives out orders and fines, does not keep highly qualified specialists. How can you ensure that your subordinates receive moral satisfaction from their work and do not look towards competing companies?

We will consider motivation problems and their solutions in our new article. With you is the business magazine “HeatherBeaver” and regular author of publications Anna Medvedeva.

At the end of the article you will find an overview of mistakes that are made when developing and implementing motivation systems. Read and prevent management failures in your organization.

1. Why is employee motivation necessary?

A new employee in a team is usually full of ideas and enthusiasm. This distinguishes him from the bulk of workers, who are no longer so zealous in fulfilling their official duties. But after some time, the newcomer merges with the general mass of employees and also becomes more passive.

This state of affairs is typical for most enterprises. This makes management think that employees need some kind of incentive to encourage them to be active, positive and self-development. Therefore, institutions interested in increasing income and productivity are introducing a motivation system.

What it is?

This is the internal need of workers to perform their job duties efficiently and effectively, as well as the creation of conditions for them that cause this need.

The correct motivation system, that is, one that produces results, involves a combination of two types - motivation collective And personal.

It’s great when a team becomes a team of like-minded people who work together towards a common goal, and everyone is aware of this very goal. But no global goals inspire as much as personal ones.

And if management manages to delve into the system of needs of its subordinates and harmoniously link personal motivation with collective motivation, then we can say that a positive result is guaranteed.

Inspire your employees- one of the main missions of a good leader. After all, if he becomes a leader not only by position, but also due to his personal qualities, the team will follow him and conquer any labor peaks. A flexible approach to business always wins.

Many will ask the question: what to do with outright slackers? Who are not motivated by any benefits and whose only goal is to receive a salary for being present at the workplace?

Competent managers simply get rid of them. Yes, it’s tough, but the main danger of parasites is not that they receive a salary for nothing. And not even that their work has to be done overtime by other employees.

The main danger of idlers - this is demotivation of the entire team. One such element can “infect” apathy and nullify the motivation of the entire team.

Here we will briefly talk about each.

Method 1. Financial incentives

There are two types of financial incentives. The table will clearly demonstrate their essence to you.

Types of material incentives for employees:

Needless to say, material reward is the most tangible and powerful type of motivation.

Method 2. Non-material reward

How to increase motivation using non-material rewards?

There are also different ways to do this:

• changing the work schedule to be beneficial for employees;
• corporate events;
• recognition ceremonies;
• change in employee status;
• change of workplace, etc.

The main goal of non-material incentives is to increase interest and job satisfaction using intellectual and moral incentives. And also add positivity to your workdays.

Method 3. Application of sanctions

This is the so-called negative motivation. That is, a system of punishments.

Forms of negative motivation:

• fines;
• deprivation of status;
• public condemnation;
• V special cases- criminal liability, etc.

Such methods of motivating employees can be effective, but only in certain cases. And they must be applied immediately after unwanted actions are carried out.

The most reasonable option is two-way motivation , that is, a combination of punishments and rewards. Moreover, rewards should act as a primary factor, and punishments as a secondary factor.

The employee motivation system is diverse and largely depends on the specifics of the enterprise.

We have chosen universal tools and principles that will be useful to any leader and will come in handy in any team.

Tip 1. Ask employees about their performance

This does not mean total control over the activities of each employee. Of course, there is some degree of control here, but the main goal is different. This technique is necessary primarily for the internal composure of employees.

Not everyone will count at the end of the working day, for example, the number of calls made and how many of them were successful. If the manager begins to be interested in this, the employee’s level of self-information will increase, as will internal motivation after a visual analysis of his own achievements.

Information from the article “” will complement this topic.

This is necessary to track the degree of interest of your employees in the results of their work. The majority of managers have a vague idea of ​​the level of motivation in their team or do not have it at all. This gap is filled by ordinary communication with the team.

At pre-planned meetings, discuss not only work issues and plans for the future. Try to delve into what is important to employees now, what motivates everyone, and what hinders progress.

During detailed conversations, employees are convinced that management is interested in the lives of their subordinates, and the manager receives important information about motivating your employees.

Tip 3. Formulate instructions to employees as clearly as possible

The same applies to the reward system. The more specific the request is formulated, the more specific the results will be.

Every employee needs to know:

• what he does;
• why is he doing this;
• within what period of time he must do this;
• what will he get for it?

Largely thanks to specifics, the employee motivation system becomes successful.

The staff themselves will help you with this. Many of them develop interesting and useful thoughts during their working life, which are sometimes useful to put into practice. The main thing is to be able to listen and find a rational grain even in the most unusual and, at first glance, unpromising ideas.

To create a bank of ideas, keep a separate notebook or file (whichever is more convenient for you) and record all your employees’ ideas in it. Do this, and you will see that most of your colleagues have an extraordinary mind and imagination, and many have a sense of humor.

Any employee who is committed to career growth also strives to learn. A person who finds himself in his place acquires new skills in his professional field with interest and pleasure. Therefore, motivation by knowledge is a very powerful lever for self-improvement.

Let's add a small nuance. Provide the opportunity to acquire new knowledge that will be useful to employees in your production. Otherwise, you can prepare a specialist for someone else.

Tip 6. Provide employees with unscheduled rest

There are many variations of this type of encouragement. For certain achievements, employees receive additional rest in the form of time off or, for example, the opportunity to come to work later on certain days or leave a little earlier.

Example

The office supply company introduced a record of goods sold during the week. A sales report is made every Friday evening.

Based on the results of the report, the most active sales manager is calculated. As a bonus for success, he receives the right to go to work on the coming Monday not in the morning, but in the afternoon.

This type of employee motivation is very important, for example, for young professionals.

We have already talked about monetary rewards above. Here it is worth mentioning separately about the calculation of annual bonuses. Such bonuses are very important for every employee, and this is natural. After all, a long reporting period is closing, and the rewards for it are the highest.

Example

If the set goals were achieved by 90% or more, the bonus is awarded in the amount of 100%.

80% of goals achieved - 50% bonus.

Less than 70% - no bonus is awarded.

4. Help in increasing employee motivation - review of the TOP 3 service companies

Now let's turn to some companies whose field of activity is related to training in the field of business management, as well as the provision of services for the development of motivation systems.

Professionals always know better how to do it and teach it to others.

1) MAS Project

The unique management system developed by this company will help improve the work process for both management and staff.

If you run a business, you will learn:

• increase the productivity of each employee;
• synchronize company goals and employee goals;
• manage projects and tasks;
• regulate areas of responsibility;
• control staff employment;
• Conduct quality planning sessions and meetings.

Thanks to the MAS Project system, employees will learn:

• track the fulfillment of goals and earned bonuses;
• manage your tasks;
• manage your employment;
• realize your role in the common cause;
• understand your own areas of responsibility;
• view all information in one resource.

You can confidently trust MAS Project. A system created while solving real business problems is the most reliable and viable.

2) Business Relations

This company is the first in Russia to begin providing training in the field of relationships. It began its activities in 1996, and in 2007 opened a corporate direction.

During professional activity The firm's specialists have become experts in the field of working with relationships. “It is the attitude to work and to life that determines the result” is the main postulate on which the entire learning process is built here.

Among others, the company offers corporate training “Business Context”, after which many organizations have already made a breakthrough in business development. The training consists of 70% practice, which allows it to dramatically increase the level of staff involvement in the work process.

3) Moscow Business School

Human resource management courses offered by the Moscow Business School will be useful not only to business managers, but also to everyone whose activities are directly related to hiring, training, motivating and improving the skills of employees.

After completing this training, you will easily:

• understand legal and financial management issues;
• develop employee motivation and reward systems;
• evaluate and hire employees;
• engage in training and development of personnel.

Business trainers and teachers at Moscow Business School are also engaged in other areas, which allows them to develop original teaching methods based on personal experience. After completing the training, you will also receive tips for further development.

5. What are the mistakes when increasing employee motivation - 5 main mistakes

Any enterprise motivation program is imperfect and often makes mistakes - this is inevitable.

We have selected the most common ones. After all, if not all, then many problems can be avoided if you know their causes.

Error 1. Punishment with rubles

This is the most ineffective employee motivation in an organization. I would even say that deprivation of bonuses and fines have the opposite effect.

As a rule, such measures are taken to stop systematic violations, and not to improve labor standards. On the one hand, this is logical. On the other hand, this approach is extremely undesirable, since it embitters people and kills any desire to perform their duties efficiently. And even more so - to develop.

Mistake 2. Lack of a feedback system

Any motivation system requires adjustments during implementation. But any change made at the suggestion of employees, that is, direct participants in the process, will be much more effective and rational.

Feedback helps to correct errors as accurately as possible. She also installs trusting relationship between managers and the team. Each employee feels not only his importance in production, but also the weight of his voice for management.

Without feedback, it is impossible for an employee to objectively evaluate the results of his work. What are its advantages and weaknesses? In which direction should we develop? What knowledge and skills are missing to make the result of work more effective?

It will not be surprising if such an employee sooner or later submits a resignation letter, even if he copes with his responsibilities and receives a decent salary.

Mistake 3: Paying too much attention to individual employees

Selecting favorites in the team invariably suggests the lack of professionalism of the manager and his bias in resolving management issues. It’s even worse when such actions directly indicate personal relationships that have nothing to do with the work process.

A competent motivation system will tell you how to identify an employee worthy of encouragement. And this will be visible not only to management, but also to other team members.

Mistake 4. Reluctance to train employees

Saving on training is always questionable. It is impossible to increase the level of labor without increasing the level of qualifications. And the second, in turn, is impossible without special training.

The opportunity to learn additional skills and develop is a strong argument in favor of the company. Even qualified specialists are guided by this factor when choosing a place of work.

Any rational motivation system provides for employee training. And every experienced manager knows that spending on improving the skills of employees always pays off.

Internal collective training is highly effective. Its result is doubly justified: employees acquire personal efficiency skills, and the manager improves his managerial qualities.

Mistake 5. Opacity of the remuneration system

This approach is the exact opposite of motivation. It will definitely leave employees feeling deceived. It is important for each person not only to receive bonuses, but also to be aware of how they are awarded.

What if, after seeing the principles of bonus distribution, employees are inspired to achieve higher achievements? Have you thought about this?

From the expert in the video, you will learn about other common mistakes that managers make when implementing a motivation system.

6. Conclusion

Let's summarize.

Motivation of employees is an internal motivation for labor feats. And in order for this impulse to arise and not be lost over time, it is necessary to create certain conditions and constantly maintain them.

Motivating staff in an organization - an example of preparing a staff motivation system in 5 steps + tips for managing staff motivation in an organization