Do you think organisations don't celebrate internal success? (employees, profit, work)

[freespiritbutterfly]

From working, I get the feeling that organisations always talk about this thing called "continuous improvement" internally.

We seem to celebrate internal successes for a minute, and then say "so this is good . . . how can we/I make this better?" for an hour.

Yes, this idea of "continuous improvement" is fantastic; we wouldn't want to become stagnant, afraid of change. But do you think that we should celebrate success more? Perhaps not be so hard on ourselves and the people around us in our companies? This, to me, drives more positive change; it allows people to own their projects, find their own selves in an organisation, work together, equally and collaborate as a team.

Beside me is an analogy of what I think a "great" organisation is. Part of me feels like a great organisation is a bit like the Spice Girls - every person has their own personality and own characteristics which can lead a company into greatness.

I know someone who has a fantastic way with people, everyone likes and respects him. He would never use the line - "this is great - what can we do better?" He would praise, genuinely, the work of people around them. And he would leave it at that. His few suggestions are carefully crafted to complement the other person. Organic, positive encouragement is all that is really needed for an organisation to improve.

I always praised this idea of pushing things to be bigger, better - this concept of continuous improvement. Until I never felt good enough. But I recently spoke to someone that said that companies are too focused on that unattainable 5%, rather than celebrating over the great 95%.

What do you think?

[Vintage_girl]

I agree with you. One of the failings I have experienced from companies is they don't reward their employees for contributing to their company's success, nor do they provide incentives to employees to make a contribution. It's about taking everything they can get to save a few bucks.

The companies I've observed who have high retention rates of employees pay their employees well, provide adequate and continuous training when appropriate, allow new ideas and make changes as needed, and remember that their employees are well you know. People.

[freespiritbutterfly]

Yes, I agree - especially about the last comment. We are people. and I am being a bit honest here, but we have egos that need to be fed. That's what ticks about this one person who gets along with everyone. He's a pro at people. He will praise your ideas, remember your name after a split second. And when he talks to you, he'll talk about your interests so you talk about yourself.


When you look at salaries a good worker is great on $50,000 per / year and equally as great on $60,000 per / year. Sure, performance incentives help, as do respectable wages. But I think it's more than money. It comes down to communication efforts to drive positive change . . .

For example:
A CEO sends out an email (written by him/her - not their PR pro) at the end of the year, thanking all of the workers, and focusing on the successes of the company over that year without mentioning what needs improving. Sure, some CEO's don't want to come down to worker's level, but this is what drives respect and, in their eyes, profit. CEO's need to realize that they are essentially, politicians.

On this idea of continuous improvement, I believe you don't often need to tell people what needs improving - as most people already know.

In a meeting, people focus their first ten minutes on the successes of an organisation, and each person spends the next 10 minutes talking about their ideas which then leads to the contribution of others.

[notoriouskelly]

Windows 8, New Coke, Yahoo's email redesign - all examples of not leaving a good thing alone.

I wonder if it's because they have people on payroll who need something to do so they must continually tinker with things rather than say, hey- it's a toaster. it toasts fine. Leave it alone for awhile.

[andywire]

I'm concerned by some of this continuous improvement attitude. Basically, the goal of many companies is to constantly improve the efficiency of their operation, mostly so they can hire fewer people. The example one of my uncles always gave working at General Motors... Every year, management would come to him with their 5% efficiency improvement goal. One year, he asked them... If we become 5% more efficient every year, won't we reach a point where we don't have anyone working for us???

That's what it's coming down to on the broad scale. Eventually, you will have a large cross section of the work force who is obsolete and permanently displaced. Companies will work around this by thinning their ranks and laying off workers to save money, which will keep them competitive for a time... This will be a never ending process at the rate things are going though.

Originally Posted by notoriouskelly

Windows 8, New Coke, Yahoo's email redesign - all examples of not leaving a good thing alone.

I wonder if it's because they have people on payroll who need something to do so they must continually tinker with things rather than say, hey- it's a toaster. it toasts fine. Leave it alone for awhile.

I've noticed that many of the newer concepts are just a rebranding or repackaging of the old. The product or service is no better than the old. It's just different, and many companies consider this good enough. IMO, they just think their customers are stupid.