Posts
I was watching a news program on the 2011 BAFTA awards. Helen Bonham Carter won the award for the Best Supporting Actress for her role in “The King’s Speech”. Accepting the award, the bemused star joked: “'I'm so used to losing, it feels quite strange to win.” She continued to point out to her children that “it’s not about the winning” before adding: “I think I should thank the Royal Family frankly because they've done wonders for my career.”
How many people in your organization go through something similar? They are always a candidate for a promotion/big award, but do not make it to the final list. After a few years, they simply give up any aspirations for recognition.
I have been very surprised at how many organizations (even very large ones), still spend a majority of their R&R budget on one or two programs that only recognize the super achievers/top performers. The same employees then get the promotions, the plum assignments and the extensive training. While I am a big supporter of companies really investing in their top talent, when it comes to R&R, the scope simply needs to be much larger.
Think of it in terms of tennis – If the only competitions were the Wimbledon and the US Open, how many people do you think would be interested in playing tennis? Why do we have competitions at various levels – local club level, district level, city level, State level, National level etc etc. This really encourages the kids to pursue tennis and slowly graduate upto the super premium competitions. Even the ones who don’t make it to the big ones have collected quite a few awards along the way and are exceptionally proud about them.
Why then do we not follow the same method when it comes to Recognition in our companies and create opportunities for a larger employee population to receive awards and be recognized?
