Morale: The Lost KPI

Today's large software development organization undoubtably has instituted Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for not just their business, but for their employees. These KPIs can vary based on the team and the tools used to measure them also vary. There will be a link here after I write the article on that, but this article will focus on probably the most important indicator for company success: morale.

Nothing can drive employee engagement and productivity like an employee wanting to do the work. An employee who feels valued, has a shared mission, and has a common goal will provide value and accomplish tasks in front of them to the best of their ability.

Despite the appearance on LinkedIn that most employees are doing what they love and that they are passionate about their field, a vast majority of employees would not show up to work if the company wasn't paying them. This truth brings us to our first key motivator and the role it plays in the workforce.

Money

Paying an employee "what they're worth" is a frequent topic of discussion and consternation. Hiring an employee for the going market rate for their title and position is important for retention and their morale. Raise time, however, becomes an even more important time in the employee's career because it's an opportunity to say, "You've gotten better at this job and you are more valued this year than you were last year".

Across the industry there are stories and tales of blanket raise policies that don't even keep up with inflation. Essentially, the company is telling the employee that not only are they worth less this year than last but they have made the same progress and contribution as all their colleagues. The organization has set the employee's continued employment at the same level of importance as everyone else's. This can be a morale killer because not only is getting paid the key motivator for most employees, it's a way to differentiate the valued employees and literally put your money where your mouth is.

So, how do we solve this?

Most larger organizations have a cadence for the review of employees and subsequent pay adjustment. Review time should not be used as a nominal exercise with mandates from on high, but as an empowerment of management to make decisions about retention bonuses and clear indicators of value. The financial impact of having to replace a good (dare I say great?) employee should be factored into the decisions made in this process.

Incompetent Co-workers
Just as rewards should be showered upon your most valued employees, the removal of employees who are not helping the company should share the same weight. It's possible that an employee needs more training, needs more support, or maybe is just wrong for the role. Identifying shortcomings is extremely important for that employee's tasks, but also for every employee they are exposed to.

A combination of business growth and cost cutting has led larger organizations to squeeze every position for the most work. The practice of eliminating positions and spreading that work into existing positions is not new - but it requires that the employees who now have that work are capable of completing it.

One incompetent employee in a nexus of an organization can make everyone's job harder to accomplish. More time and energy can be spent avoiding that employee than would be necessary if the appropriate resource was in the right place. Every employee's morale who passes through that nexus can be negatively affected.

So, how do we solve this?
Hiring is hard. Firing is hard. Essentially, once a hiring manager has gone through the process of hiring and onboarding an employee, there are sizable disincentives to removing them from the organization. Pruning dead weight or upskilling employees is still of vital importance to every company. Companies should create anonymous spaces where peer evaluations can take place and those evaluations can be shared in a productive way with managers.

In the context of layoffs - it becomes even more important to evaluate which employees should be retained in reference to their value to the company. Laying off well liked and productive employees while retaining poor employees because "of the math problem" can harm morale company-wide.

Trust
Speaking of layoffs - with the rash of layoffs at all the major tech firms in the past year, employees are losing trust with their organization. Trust is an important building block for any relationship and that fact carries over into the workplace. Employees must have trust that they are part of a corporate team and not just a number on a spreadsheet.

With the emergence of MmAgile (micro-management Agile) in software development, a certain level of trust has evaporated between developers and decision makers.