On the Road 77proverbial carrot nor the stick is very satisfactory, but what
do you expect of a metaphor that treats people like rabbits
or donkeys?
Threatening people with dire consequences if they do not
do what they are supposed to do may certainly overcome in-
ertia and refusal. People will work if the consequences of not
working are bad enough, but what of the quality of the work?
Punishment produces compliance, not results, and certainly
not enthusiasm. Nor does it foster creativity. Threats pro-
duce anxiety and anxiety hinders the free flow of ideas that
creative thinking needs. This reminds me of a car sticker:
‘The flogging will continue until morale improves.’
Managers sometimes justify the stick by pointing to better
results, with the assumption that the threats caused the
improvements. Alas, this is unlikely. One event coming
before another does not automatically mean that the first is
the cause of the second; the rooster does not make the sun
rise every morning, although it may think it does. Bad results
are much more likely to improve than get worse due to the
simple law of statistics known as regression: results average
out over time. Poor performance will eventually improve
even when left to itself. The law of regression is not personal,
just statistics. It casts doubt equally on better results being
caused by rewards. Very good performance falters because it
meets limits; leaders have to identify those possible limits in
advance and allow for them to consistently shift the average
upwards and deliver sustainable improvement. It takes some-
thing extra to sustain good (or poor) performance over a
long period of time.
The ‘carrot’ approach is the basis of incentives, bonuses
and rewards. It works on the principle that people are moti-
vated by rewards, not threats. Does it work? Certainly.
Rewards are good for overcoming apathy and inertia. Do
they produce creative work? Not necessarily. People will pro-
duce good work for reward, for money, for recognition and
for satisfaction. But how well do rewards work as an extra in-
centive, on top of a fair payment? How well do they work in
getting people to work smarter, rather than harder?