I Like You – Here’s Some Money

 Peer to Peer programs (P2P) are pretty much a standard offering in employee reward and recognition programs today.  If you’re not looking at P2P as a feature in your program – got back and start over.  P2P is a common and well-liked option within a company’s recognition strategy.

For those under a rock – P2P is where one employee can give recognition to another employee as they see fit.  In many cases these recognition events are without monetary reward – but do provide the employees with a way to highlight performance above and beyond.  What’s nice about P2P is that they are user generated, easy to do, provide some level of control to the employee (a motivating factor in and of itself) and if a management team is smart – helps identify contributors that may be hidden by poor managers, poor systems or lack of proximity to the employee (physically or temporally.)

There are some instances where the P2P awards are put into a monthly/quarterly sweepstakes in order to attach a tangible award to them.  That’s nice, but it’s a game of chance then.  Someone who was recognized by their fellow employees 2,067 times may not ever “win” a monthly sweepstakes but some buffoon in Marketing who held the door open last Wednesday may get the gift card, or plaque, or iPad.  Not always fair when you do the “chance” thing.  Just sayin’.

I personally think P2P programs are openers for any enterprise recognition strategy.  I also think P2P programs need more teeth than simple ecards and sweepstakes.  I believe each employee should be given individual recognition budgets they can use to reinforce company values, mission and specific over-the-top behaviors.

But IGN thinks it’s more about the money than the recognition.

Color me interested, but not invested, in the idea…

“Viral Pay” System at IGN

Last Friday on the HRMorning site I saw a post on IGN and their “unique” system of allowing individual employees to allocate a portion of the company’s profits to fellow employees.  To quote the article on HRMorning:

“Twice a year, in January and July, IGN calculates how much profit there is to share. Based on that figure, it distributes ‘tokens of appreciation’ worth $1 a piece among its employees. Then employees must give all their tokens away to their co-workers.
.
Employees can give the tokens to whomever they want, except IGN’s president.
.
Workers are not told the names of those who gave them tokens.
.
The company does publicize the number of tokens received by top employees, as well as the average amount employees received.
.
Managers are also given tokens to give to strong performing employees they feel may have been overlooked in the token giveaway.“
.

I like it because, like the post highlights, it does democratize rewards and recognition, and helps identify hidden stars in the organization.

It’s really not “unique” – @zappos (everyone drink!) allocates around $500 in cash to each employee for them to reward as they see fit.  Same thing, they’ve just cut out the “tokens.”   Not sure from my conversations with zappos.com if the awards are anonymous though.

The Good The Bad and The Ugly

The Good…

• Employees get control over the distribution of some of the company’s profits.
• Employees may well be the best judge of who is working toward the common good and who is not.  Managers can be blinded by style over substance and continually reward the best political player – not the best player.  This has the potential to mitigate that.
• It gives smart management a peak under the covers so to speak – getting a glimpse of who is really driving company success and provides a bigger pool of potential high-performer to keep your eyes on.

The Bad…

• It’s compensation-based and therefore has the possibility (I’d say probability) of becoming an entitlement and requirement in the future.  Many employees may begin to expect this type of compensation.
• If the amounts are too rich (can’t tell from the article) behaviors can be skewed from working for the best of the company – to working for the best for Bob in Accounting.  Those activities may not be aligned.
• Because we’re talking “cash” here – I’d be a bit worried about collusion.  I know the article says it’s “anonymous”” – but really – what is anonymous today?

The Ugly

• It is tied to company profitability.  I understand it – but I don’t like it. 
• In my mind if a company believes that individual effort is important.  If they believe that recognition is a key way to highlight great employee work.  If the company really believes that recognition and reward is a way to drive superior performance and employee engagement – it SHOULD NOT be tied to profitability.

What, wait? Not Tied To Profitability?

Think about it this way…

Tying awards to profitability is kind of a chicken/egg thing right?  If I don’t have profits, I can’t recognize people, therefore I can’t get people engaged with the company, and therefore I don’t get profits.  Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

If you base this on profitability then you have to have done something else before being profitable to get to profitability and by definition – that “something else” worked and you wouldn’t need to do this.  Right?

Don’t get me wrong- I’m big on sharing success.  But I think any forward-thinking company that believes their employees are critical to their long-term success would invest in rewards and recognition regardless of profitability.  I’d cut free massages, free coffee and executive luxury car leases before I’d cut back on my recognition budget.

So Net-Net

• Do P2P programs.
• Don’t tie them to compensation.
• Do them regardless of profitability.

What do you think?  Is this better, worse or just an added nicety for employees?

Before you agree/disagree – think about this…

Fun Facts

Coming off the Golden Globe awards last night I started thinking about manager vs. peer recognition in a company and it reminded me of the way in which Oscar’s are awarded.  The Academy (read: managers) vote for what they think are the best.  But that isn’t always a reflection of what is popular with the movie-going (and paying) public (the employees.)  Many times it’s not even a close race between popular and Oscar worthy.

To-wit:  Top 10 lowest grossing Best Picture winners:

This tells me you need both.  I’d take out the cash though…

What are your thoughts?

Related articles

• YOU Are the Reason Your Recognition Program Failed (i2i-align.com)
• Motivation and Recognition “Lose Weight Trap” (i2i-align.com)