|
|
|
|
|
by KyleJune
1028 days ago
|
|
If you create a financial incentive for a behavior, you're telling your employees you want to see that behavior. If it was a problem and KPIs work, they should have changed them to make them align more with the business needs. |
|
And it's not just individual people modifying their behavior to game things, but more of an evolutionary process that the people who tend towards gaming things will get better bonuses, better reviews, better CVs, hence better next jobs, in perpetuity.
"Don't game it" can't be a simple solution. If there are people who game things, and they accumulate rewards for it, you will just see them out compete the nongamers. You are basically telling people to sacrifice their and their family's financial position for the sake of the corporation.
Everything can and will be gamed. But at the same time if many game it, managers will really want to see evidence of nongaming, so employees are also incentivized to signal their honesty, but this must be given some kind of channel too. If managers myopically focus on gameable metrics, then their loss. You must alwas leave a door open for receiving honesty signals through some kinds of side channels. These must always be somewhat amorphous because the moment you define them, they become gameable.
In other words, no recipe, stay alert, try to cooperate but don't be a pushover, etc.