Tech Pro Motivation Project

I am no HR or motivational guru, so the factors I am listing here are not based on any research. They are based more on my personal experience. I acted as a manager quite early in my career, and reached a conclusion that i would serve myself and the industry better by continuing my career as an engineer. Since, I have worked with the best known employers in the software industry. So, I have faced the motivational issues on either side, as an engineer who felt demotivated, and as a manager who is fighting to motivate the team. Many factors i mention below are probably specific to the Indian software industry, as it is dominated by low-end outsourced work, though it is changing for the better.

Key Demotivating Factors
-------------------------------------

1. High degree of uncertainty/Lack of long term vision/goals - I am sure most readers are aware of SMART goals. Almost every goal setting document has a section on long term goals, but I have rarely seen a genuine interest on the part of managers to help the team members in meeting their long term goals. I think it is because often engineers become managers by virtue of the number of years they have put in, and are just not capable of thinking beyond running the business. In the absence of long term goals, any lull in the projects/work at hand leads to a high degree of uncertainty in the team - "What will i be doing 2 weeks from now". Note that this is not the same as job insecurity.

2. Loss of trust/Double Speak - I guess Microsoft would have lost quite a few senior engineers in the Internet division since it announced its intention to takeover Yahoo. I am sure even a month before the announcement, there would have been all hands meets where they would toast the successes, and paint a rosy future.

A common experience in India is - when big product companies set up shop in India, they would call it - "Centre of Excellence", "Centre of Innovation" - and tell you 10 great reasons why it is a great place to work. However, most of them often turn out to be job shops, with only low end maintenance work available. This inevitably ends up demotivating bright engineers.

3. Lack of visible leadership accountability - It would be preposterous to claim that there isn't leadership accountability. However, it can be demotivating an engineer does not see visible outcomes of a manager/leader not meeting expectations. Also demotivating is a perception that the manager is not accountable to the engineers for their growth.

4. Wrong fit - Hiring over/under-qualified personnel, no matter what the compulsions, more often than not leads to a demotivated workforce.

5. Micro-management - I think this one needs no elaboration

I am sure I can list a lot more demotivating factors. And these factors would certainly vary from person to person. Also, i am sure no manager intends to demotivate her own team members.

I think a sincere effort at identifying why a person is demotivated (when you find someone's motivation levels are low) - and it has to be aimed at each team member individually (as opposed to a why my team is demotivated approach) - goes a long way in coming out with an individualised motivation program - which could be :

- Individualised incentive schemes
- Finding a better fit in another team
- Reorienting long term goals

For this to happen though, there needs to be serious leadership commitment and initiative. As long as there are SMART goals (aimed at keeping the team motivated) that line managers are accountable for, motivation should come easy. Of course, this assumes that the engineer didn't make a short term call when joining the organization in the first place.

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Rajesh,

I concur. You've hit on a number of my pet topics. I'd like to add more while I think of it:

Over the past few decades, (yes, I've been around the block a few times), I've seen some trends that are sabotaging the efforts of many IT departments and demotivating their staff.

When I first entered this industry, qualified technical people populated the first and second tiers of management and they were generally consulted in the selection of the technology to be used by an organization. Two things have happened since:

1. More and more technologically illiterate people are filling management roles in IT

2. Selection of technology is being made by people at the highest levels of a company without consulting the people who are using it, installing it, maintaining it, or programming it. Consequently, those decisions are now being based almost purely on very superficial cost benefit analyses (with the much greater emphasis on cost). That is, the solution that involves the lowest initial cost seems to, invariably, win. Little to no consideration is being given to the level of inconvenience, frustration, and inefficiency caused .

I have spoken with a number of individuals who recount horror stories of how a well-functioning IT department (or even whole corporations) were rendered dysfunctional virtually overnight via the introduction of a "more cost-effective" technology. I'm not talking about the inconvenience of a steep learning curve. I'm talking about products and services that do not work as well as those they replaced more than two years after their introduction.

These episodes are rarely documented or reported. Why? The person responsible for monitoring the success of the decision is often the person who made the decision in the first place. There are many ways to manipulate statistics to show success. At least long enough to collect three to four quarterly bonuses for saving the company so much money.

Reply to This

I think a lot of these items are definitely spot on. Btw I think a great discussion on motivation is from TED and can be found here. Worth some time. It can help refine some of the things every leader does.

Reply to This

RSS

© 2010   Created by Kevin Jenkins on Ning.   Create a Ning Network!

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy  |  Terms of Service

Sign in to chat!