Comments on: Spiffs, Bonuses and Contests - Ask the Expert #3 http://leapcomp.com/2008/04/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3.html Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:47:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Amber http://leapcomp.com/2008/04/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3.html#comment-15906 Amber Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:19:15 +0000 http://julienldionne.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3/#comment-15906 My company is currently evaluating all pay programs and I came across your blog when looking for info on contests and SPIFFs. You say the following: "They should not be used to spike performance during a period." We use contests and SPIFFs to drive this very behavior - what do you recommend that a company SHOULD use to spike performance? Thanks for your input. My company is currently evaluating all pay programs and I came across your blog when looking for info on contests and SPIFFs. You say the following:

“They should not be used to spike performance during a period.”

We use contests and SPIFFs to drive this very behavior - what do you recommend that a company SHOULD use to spike performance?

Thanks for your input.

]]> By: admin http://leapcomp.com/2008/04/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3.html#comment-5517 admin Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:32:48 +0000 http://julienldionne.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3/#comment-5517 Hi Jeanette, I'm not sure exactly what you are looking for. Maybe I'll be able to help if you can clarify what you need. Thanks, Julien Hi Jeanette,

I’m not sure exactly what you are looking for. Maybe I’ll be able to help if you can clarify what you need.

Thanks,
Julien

]]> By: Jeanette Davis http://leapcomp.com/2008/04/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3.html#comment-5383 Jeanette Davis Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:05:33 +0000 http://julienldionne.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3/#comment-5383 Do you know of a place where I can purchase salesperson spiff boards that are already done. I have purchased in the past and dont recall where. They are games and contests for spiffs that allow you to fill in the bonus amounts. Do you know of a place where I can purchase salesperson spiff boards that are already done. I have purchased in the past and dont recall where. They are games and contests for spiffs that allow you to fill in the bonus amounts.

]]> By: Julien Dionne http://leapcomp.com/2008/04/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3.html#comment-13 Julien Dionne Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:01:00 +0000 http://julienldionne.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3/#comment-13 Apparently David Cichelli was not able to post his comment directly on the blog, but he asked me to post this on his behalf:<br/><br/>-----------------<br/><br/>I am responding to Paul Hebert’s thoughtful observations that he supports the use of “chance” for incentive programs. As I had previously wrote, I suggested that incentives should not involve a “chance” to win a payout. Paul pointed out that he has had great success with these programs and they are cost effective and helpful in driving performance.<br/><br/>I am going to agree with Paul, that they are—indeed—effective. However, effectiveness is not my issue...ethics is.<br/><br/>Most “chance” incentive programs require some degree of performance in order to get a “chance” to win a reward. In most cases, the number of accomplishments, such as sales, or calls made, gives the employee a chance of wining. It could be a “spin” board or “names in a hat.” These programs are very fun and popular with employees.<br/><br/>However, here is the issue. “Intermittent Operate Conditioning” is the fancy Skinnerian phrase to describe why people like to gamble. The random payouts are seductive to humans. Just visit Las Vegas to see this phenomenon in action. <br/><br/>In my humble opinion, employees work for a wage and should be paid for that effort. Providing them a “chance” (no matter how trivial the effort required) ethically violates this employment construct. <br/><br/>Finally, if the chance to “win” does not require any pre-performance, then I am fine with chance. Otherwise keep the gambling where is belongs: in a casino.<br/><br/>David Cichelli Apparently David Cichelli was not able to post his comment directly on the blog, but he asked me to post this on his behalf:

—————–

I am responding to Paul Hebert’s thoughtful observations that he supports the use of “chance” for incentive programs. As I had previously wrote, I suggested that incentives should not involve a “chance” to win a payout. Paul pointed out that he has had great success with these programs and they are cost effective and helpful in driving performance.

I am going to agree with Paul, that they are—indeed—effective. However, effectiveness is not my issue…ethics is.

Most “chance” incentive programs require some degree of performance in order to get a “chance” to win a reward. In most cases, the number of accomplishments, such as sales, or calls made, gives the employee a chance of wining. It could be a “spin” board or “names in a hat.” These programs are very fun and popular with employees.

However, here is the issue. “Intermittent Operate Conditioning” is the fancy Skinnerian phrase to describe why people like to gamble. The random payouts are seductive to humans. Just visit Las Vegas to see this phenomenon in action.

In my humble opinion, employees work for a wage and should be paid for that effort. Providing them a “chance” (no matter how trivial the effort required) ethically violates this employment construct.

Finally, if the chance to “win” does not require any pre-performance, then I am fine with chance. Otherwise keep the gambling where is belongs: in a casino.

David Cichelli

]]> By: Paul Hebert http://leapcomp.com/2008/04/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3.html#comment-12 Paul Hebert Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:01:00 +0000 http://julienldionne.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/spiffs-bonuses-and-contests-ask-the-expert-3/#comment-12 I might disagree with #5 - variable payouts have proven to be very effective in driving performance.<br/><br/>The issue is not to structure the program rules so it is an "all or nothing" deal. Pay something for the behavior - but allow for some upside earnings based on random payouts.<br/><br/>I've used "spin/win" type programs very effectively - both for the client and the participant. If the audience understands the rules and doesn't have all their earnings wiped out by the random portion of the game it is a great way to keep interest in the program going - and provide a much higher level of participation while maintaining budget integrity. I might disagree with #5 - variable payouts have proven to be very effective in driving performance.

The issue is not to structure the program rules so it is an “all or nothing” deal. Pay something for the behavior - but allow for some upside earnings based on random payouts.

I’ve used “spin/win” type programs very effectively - both for the client and the participant. If the audience understands the rules and doesn’t have all their earnings wiped out by the random portion of the game it is a great way to keep interest in the program going - and provide a much higher level of participation while maintaining budget integrity.

]]>