Meritocracy- Part II

Philosophically:
Sweety pointed out that the big tech companies that use merit-based systems successfully are for profit. Everybody there is there for money. At sweety's job, when they made bonuses commensurate with how much product got sold (good product, that didn't need to be recalled or repaired), everyone really was motivated to work harder. There was a direct correlation between the work and the purpose of the company. Also, the reward was for the whole team. If the team worked together effectively to create more good product to sell, then the team got more profit from the sale of that product.

Contrast that with the new situation at my work. Everyone is individually rated on a scale, there is a finite amount of money in the therapy budget allocated for raises. HR will decide based on your rating, relative to everyone else's, how much of that money goes to you.

There are two glaring problems with this:

1. Our company is non-profit, and though we all really like getting paid, profit or production is not the reason we come to work each day. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we don't like making money, just that "profit" isn't in line with the hospital's goals in the same way that it is for the companies our CEO is using as a model.
2. The new reward system is competitive vs cooperative. Health care right now is pushing hard to move toward a team approach to everything. Interdisciplinary teams are the buzzword of a good organization. We are encouraged daily through modeling, trainings, and motivational banners to promote teamwork and work together. And the teamwork works REALLY well. The team aspect of my job is easily the most effective and most satisfying, and patients get better care. It's a huge part of why I like the unit I work on, and what motivates me to work harder. The new system is a jarring, discordant note - it's a weight dragging at the progress toward this excellent goal.

Nonviolent Communication:
Okay, these people are a little fruity- and, like lots of people who are passionate about an idea, come off as a little preachy as well. That said, my shrink had me watch a DVD of a seminar by the guy who started this, and there were definitely some ideas that worked for me.

1. That the common relational strategy of using rewards/punishment to get what we want from people, is coercive and inherently violent. Instead of seeing people as people, it sees them as a means to an end. We dehumanize them, even if only a little tiny bit, and this is a violent mindset. (This idea echoes something Jesus says about the commandment "thou shalt not kill". He points out that hating someone in your heart is qualitatively the same as killing them, inviting us to move beyond simply following rules of conduct to transforming the way we think about others.)
2. Another idea that I like is that the nonviolent communication mindset is generalizable- it should enhance peace, effectiveness, communication across contexts. I'm a simple creature and I much prefer generalizable tools over a highly varied and complex skill set.

Here is a pretty representative quote from their website:

"This approach to communication emphasizes compassion as the motivation for action rather than fear, guilt, shame, blame, coercion, threat or justification for punishment. In other words, it is about getting what you want for reasons you will not regret later. NVC is NOT about getting people to do what we want. It is about creating a quality of connection that gets everyone’s needs met through compassionate giving."

So grab your grain of salt, and go check 'em out. Here is an article on their website about using NVC at a psychiatric hospital, it made me happy so I'm recommending you start there.