Introduction
For the promotion to be as effective as possible, it is necessary to adhere to certain rules when appointing it. The scheme proposed by Henry Simms for the same encouragement of all employees has many drawbacks. Rewarding all project participants equally is not a wise decision and the employee reward in this case should be handled differently. From the method of remuneration proposed by the Plant Manager, the effect will be exactly the opposite: it can result in conflicts in the team and a decrease in labor productivity. In this regard, the HR manager needs to have a conversation with the Plant Manager offering an alternative option for employee compensation.
Discussion
By encouraging employees, their motivation and loyalty can be increased. However, this tool works effectively only if several basic principles are followed. Both the size and the type of reward should correspond to the contribution of the encouraged employee to the overall result (Hussain et al., 2019). In this case, Henry Sims wants to violate this principle by unfairly paying bonuses to all employees. At the same time, it leaves the outcomes of strong contributors without attention. The expected result will be the dissatisfaction of the staff and their distrust of any decisions of the authorities. Moreover, when implementing the remuneration plan proposed by the Plant Manager, the basic principle of fairness will be violated. The award criteria should be set in such a way that employees have no doubts about the objectivity and impartiality of management decisions (Hussain et al., 2019). In this case, the same encouragement of all employees will be regarded as justified.
Moreover, it should be noted that the employee’s motivation when receiving guaranteed encouragement decreases. Since the employees know that they will get the reward in any case, they may not work at full strength. The principle of selectivity when awarding a reward will motivate the employee to work at full strength. It is desirable to encourage employees based on the results of their work. If an employee processes and performs work efficiently and ahead of time it is better to reward them more. With the same remuneration for both strong contributors and those who did not work at full strength, employees will have no incentive to work effectively. Guaranteed encouragement regardless of labor results will significantly reduce labor productivity and can be considered by strong contributors as devaluing their efforts.
Conclusion
As an alternative, fair encouragement should be offered, which should become a precedent. Since in this case, all employees have contributed to the major project, everyone also needs to be rewarded. However, since this is one of the ways to motivate employees to continue working with the company, it makes no sense to reward temporary workers. Since the appeal to the services was a one-time one, it is better to invest in strengthening relations with permanent staff. To avoid conflicts in the team, everyone involved in the project should be given special thanks, which will increase the status among colleagues. To emphasize the efforts of strong contributors, in their case, it is necessary to combine the types of encouragement. They should not only declare gratitude but also allocate a cash bonus. The combination of material and moral incentives is the best option for proper motivation, which can be used as a precedent in the future.
Reference
Hussain, S. D., Khaliq, D. A., Nisar, Q. A., Kamboh, A. Z., & Ali, S. (2019). Impact of employees’ recognition, rewards and job stress on job performance: Mediating role of perceived organization support. SEISENSE Journal of Management, 2(2), 69-82.