Michael Lissack
Individual vs. Collective Recognition
Recognition systems that focus exclusively on individual contribution often undermine collaboration and system optimization. A sales com- pensation system that rewards only personal sales targets, for instance, can discourage cooperation even when shared approaches would benefit customers and the organization. Conversely, systems that recognize only collective achievement can create free-rider problems and diminish the motivation that comes from personal acknowledgment. Solving this tension requires multidimensional recognition that hon- ors both individual contribution and collective achievement. Atlassian, for example, includes both personal impact and team contribution in their per- formance evaluation framework. Engineers receive recognition for their specific code contributions and for how they enable team success through activities like mentorship, knowledge sharing, and cross-functional col- laboration. This balanced approach acknowledges individual effort while reinforcing that ultimate success depends on collective outcomes.
Visible vs. Invisible Contributions
Digital recognition systems naturally emphasize what can be easily measured and observed. Code commits, customer interactions, docu- ment edits, and meeting participation generate clear digital traces that recognition systems can capture. However, many crucial contributions remain less visible: the quiet mentorship that develops team capability, the behind-the-scenes conflict resolution that prevents project derailment, the relationship building that enables future collaboration. Organizations that rely exclusively on automatically captured metrics inevitably undervalue these less visible but often essential contributions. The most effective recognition approaches deliberately incorporate mech- anisms for acknowledging work that doesn't automatically generate digital traces. Microsoft's performance review system, for instance, explicitly
244
Made with FlippingBook. PDF to flipbook with ease