In a competitive broking world, the pressure to be the best is always high, but a little healthy competition may not be so healthy after all, according to new research.
In a competitive broking world, the pressure to be the best is always high, but a little healthy competition may not be so healthy after all, according to new research.
Within you brokerage there are likely to be three types of employees: Givers, takers and matchers, says Wharton University management professor Adam Grant.
'Givers', says Grant, are predisposed to coach and aid their colleagues and to take up extra work without expecting anything back.
'Takers', in contrast, operate on a “me” level, and 'matchers' fall somewhere in the middle – giving help when they expect an equal return.
While many may expect the ‘matcher’ culture to be most efficient and just, Grant's research has found that it creates silos and inefficiencies.
“[In matcher cultures] employees trade favours in closed loops,” says Grant. “Should you need ideas or information from someone in a different division or region, you could be out of luck unless you have an existing relationship. Instead, you would probably seek out people you trust, regardless of their expertise.”
“By contrast, in giver cultures, where colleagues aim to add value without keeping score, you would probably reach out more broadly and count on help from the most qualified person.”
These ‘giver cultures’ can improve productivity and performance by:
- enabling employees to solve problems and get work done faster
- enhancing team cohesion and coordination
- ensuring that expertise is transferred from experienced to new employees
- reducing variability in performance when some members are overloaded or distracted
- establishing an environment in which customers and suppliers feel that their needs are the organization’s top priority
But traditional competitive structures, says Grant, can discourage the natural givers in your brokerage and cause them to put their guard up.
“When leaders implement forced-ranking systems to reward individual performance, they stack the deck against giver cultures,” says Grant.
“Pitting employees against one another for resources makes it unwise for them to provide help unless they expect to receive at least as much—or more—in return. Employees who give discover the costs quickly: their productivity suffers as takers exploit them by monopolizing their time or even stealing their ideas.
“Over time, employees anticipate taking-behaviour and protect themselves by operating like takers or by becoming matchers, who expect and seek reciprocity whenever they give help.”
Businesses that cultivated a culture of giving are rewarded with higher productivity and staff engagement, says Grant, but an abrupt switch from a competitive culture to a collaborative culture can result in even poorer results than the original competitive culture.
In a study conducted by the University of Washington, a team was offered individual rewards for completing a task the fastest, and in the next task were offered a team reward for completing the task collaboratively.
“People struggled to transition from competitive to cooperative rewards,” found the study. “Instead of shifting from taking to giving, they developed a pattern of cutthroat cooperation.
“Once they had seen their colleagues as competitors, they couldn’t trust them. Completing a single task under a structure that rewarded taking created win–lose mind-sets, which persisted even after the structure was removed.”
A number of organisations have developed ways to successfully maintain the balance between competition and collaboration.
Grants reported a technique used by Linden Lab, the company behind virtual reality game Second Life, in which employees could send a ‘tip’ to colleagues that had helped them.
The messages were visible to all employees, and added an average of $3 to the helper’s paycheck for each one.
Founder Philip Rosedale explains that the system “gives us a way of rewarding and encouraging collaborative behaviour".
But the key point to remember when creating a giver culture, stresses grant, is to lead by example.
“When it comes to giver cultures, the role-modelling lesson here is a powerful one: if you want it, go and give it.”
