Think at London Business School: fresh ideas and opinions from LBS faculty and other experts direct to your inbox
Not too long ago, the use of bonuses was believed to be an effective compensation system that was designed to incentivise people. By providing these financial incentives, people would be motivated to work harder and perform better. True, but sadly, from what I have seen over the last year, bonuses seem to encourage the wrong type of motivation.
I would much prefer people to be motivated in an intrinsic way. ‘Intrinsic motivation’ refers to the idea that people do a job well because they truly enjoy the things they have to do. They are motivated to perform their tasks well because they like to and not because they have to. Through intrinsic motivation, the focus remains on the job itself and not on the perks that it may bring.
Unfortunately, the use of incentive pay in the financial world seems to have undermined this intrinsic motivation. Rather, in the presence of free-market economy rules, the purpose of bonuses in the financial world seems to have shifted. Instead of being offered as a reward for a job well done, they now appear to be handed out simply because the job was done. Intrinsic motivation has been replaced by ‘extrinsic motivation’: the bonus is no longer the reward and, instead, has become the motivation.
A psychological consequence of such an extrinsically motivated state of mind is that, for the individual, the interest in one’s job diminishes and, ultimately, the quality of work suffers. Take a look, for example, at how a narrow focus adopted by bankers to ensure that they met their bonus target criteria revealed doubtful actions that contributed to the emergence of the current financial crisis. Behavioural research shows that using criteria to set bonuses can motivate people to engage in fraud more readily. Just imagine knowing that you will miss out on a hefty bonus by a slight margin. The temptation to misrepresent your performance figures, even only slightly, and cash in on the desired bonus becomes great.
If the negative effect of the bonus-incentive construction is so great, why then keep this form of incentive structure? I was involved in interviews with 15 Dutch executives responsible for hiring bankers. The findings indicate that the bonus culture is, in fact, something of a self-created myth that is maintained in the collective mind of the financial world. I asked executives how important they considered bonuses to be for their own work performance and motivation.
I also asked them how important they considered bonuses to be for the performance and motivation of other bankers. As could be predicted by the self-enhancement bias (something we all suffer from), the executives were convinced of the benefit of bonuses in motivating others to do their jobs well, more so than was necessary for their own personal motivation. “I don’t need a bonus — but everyone else does,” seemed to be what they were saying. It goes without saying that their biased belief led them to hire those bankers most motivated by financial incentives whereas they actually preferred those with a less greedy attitude.
Clearly, the idea that bonuses should be the primary incentive structure appears to be hardwired into the minds of those working in the financial world and, due to their own fears and biases, is likely to remain so. If we want to change the reward culture over the long term, it is imperative that, instead of just implementing rules limiting the size of bonuses, we should specifically create interventions based on behavioural insights that can help us to change the mindset of those in the financial world.
Which interventions can help to make the allocation of bonuses effective and justifiable? I suggest five:
You must be a registered user to add a comment here. If you’ve already registered, please log in. If you haven’t registered yet, please register and log in.Login/Create a Profile