Winning the War for Talent: Modern Motivational Methods for Attracting and Retaining Employees

Anais  Thibault-Landry; Allan  Schweyer; Ashley V. Whillans

Article | Compensation & Benefits Review | September 2017

Winning the War for Talent: Modern Motivational Methods for Attracting and Retaining Employees

by Anais Thibault-Landry, Allan Schweyer and Ashley V. Whillans

Abstract

Given the struggle that many organizations face hiring and retaining talent in today's tight labor market, it is critical to understand how to effectively reward employees. To address this question, we review relevant evidence that explains the importance of workplace rewards and recognition. Based on a review and synthesis of the current literature, we make the case that organizations should move beyond salary and traditional cash rewards to place greater emphasis on non-pecuniary, tangible and intangible rewards and recognition initiatives. We further highlight the importance of aligning rewards with universal psychological needs. Finally, we discuss the need to conduct more research to understand when and for whom cash and non-cash rewards increase intrinsic motivation, organizational commitment, and optimal functioning in order to improve the design and implementation of existing reward programs.

Keywords: rewards; total reward strategies; incentives; recognition; motivation; psychological needs; Employees; Retention; Motivation and Incentives; Working Conditions;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Thibault-Landry, Anais, Allan Schweyer, and Ashley V. Whillans. "Winning the War for Talent: Modern Motivational Methods for Attracting and Retaining Employees." Compensation & Benefits Review 49, no. 4 (September 2017): 230–246.

In the past decade, behavioral science has undergone beneficial shifts towards greater transparency and more rigorous research. However, we wondered whether this heightened focus on confirmation might make researchers feel inhibited towards doing research, and reduce the propensity to explore. Study 1 (N=404), a descriptive survey, indicated that relative to confirmatory research, researchers found exploratory research more enjoyable, motivating, and interesting; and less anxiety-inducing, frustrating, boring, and scientific. It also introduced a scale to measure research inhibition; higher scores were linked to running fewer studies and were particularly common among women, untenured professors, and receiving one’s PhD after 2011—when reforms began. Study 2 (N=463), a pre-registered experiment, indicated that a confirmatory mindset made researchers less likely to find an interesting (non-hypothesized) interaction. A reminder to explore did not mitigate this effect. These studies suggest that work is needed to ensure that rigorous scientific reforms and exploration can coexist.

Across five field experiments with employees of a large organization (n = 68,915), we examined whether standard behavioural interventions (“nudges”) successfully reduced single-occupancy vehicle commutes. In Studies 1 and 2, we sent letters and emails with nudges designed to increase carpooling. These interventions failed to increase carpool sign up or usage. In Studies 3a and 4, we examined the efficacy of other well-established behavioural interventions: non-cash incentives and personalized travel plans. Again, we found no positive effect of these interventions. Across studies, effect sizes ranged from Cohen’s d = -0.01 to d =0.05. Equivalence testing, using study-specific smallest effect sizes of interest, revealed that the treatment effects observed in four out of five of our experiments were statistically equivalent to zero (P < 0.04). The failure of these well-powered experiments designed to nudge commuting behaviour highlights both the difficulty of changing commuter behaviour and the importance of publishing null results to build cumulative knowledge about how to encourage sustainable travel.

Consumers feel increasingly pressed for time and money. Gifts have the potential to reduce scarcity in recipients’ lives, yet little is known about how recipients perceive gifts given with the intention of saving them time or money. Across 4 studies (N=1,403), we demonstrate that the recipients of gifts intending to save money experience more negative self-conscious emotions and infer lower status position than recipients of gifts intending to save time. Recipients who report experiencing greater financial scarcity in their daily lives (who may benefit most from gifts intending to save them money), experience negative emotions to a greater extent and perceive an even lower status position than recipients who experience relatively little money scarcity. These findings are the first to directly evaluate the implications of receiving gifts seeking to address time and money scarcity and suggest that recipients may benefit more from gifts given with the intention to save time.

Faculty & Research

Winning the War for Talent: Modern Motivational Methods for Attracting and Retaining Employees

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author