Recap


Some people have asked the following logical question:

"If we go back to Csikszentmihalyi's two-dimensional plot of job difficulty versus skill level, we can infer that the team member is more productive when in the flow channel and less productive when outside it. Can we use this information to predict total contribution to the organization as a function of job difficulty and skill level?"

The answer is that we can try to model this information. The model would be very useful, because if we knew the contribution, we could try to make the compensation relate more closely to it.

Recall that in our basic flow channel model (refer to Figure 16.1), the channel consists of two lines that go upward and to the right. So let us make a few simplifying assumptions. In our simplified model, these two lines are parallel and the flow channel does not "open up." I assume that factors affecting productivity outside the flow model are small compared to those implicit in the flow model. As I have clearly stated elsewhere, this is a big assumption, and it should cause us to not attach more to these predictions than the model itself justifies. Productivity affects contribution, which in turn should affect compensation, so we need to understand the factors we exclude from the model that can materially affect productivity.

Next, I'll assume that contributionthe "performance" we are paying foris the product of job difficulty and productivity. That is, for equally productive people, those doing harder jobs are contributing more.

I'll also assume that, at a given level of job difficulty, all skill levels within the flow channel have equal productivity, arbitrarily set to 1. This seems reasonable, as team members can be optimally productive anywhere within the flow channel. In the example we will see next, the flow channel is fairly wide; this is part of the model. Setting the breadth of the channel relative to other factors is one way to "tune" the model.

Then, I will assume that, at the same level of job difficulty (a horizontal line on the plot), productivity tails off as we move farther and farther away from the flow channel, both in the anxiety region and the boredom region. In our example, I have made this productivity degradation fairly rapid once outside the channel. At one skill level outside the channel, productivity drops to 0.75; at the second, to 0.50; at the third, to 0.25; and at the fourth to zero. If we choose a different rate at which productivity decreases, we will get a different profile. This is another way to "tune" the model.

The plot in Figure 16.9 shows the contribution measured in arbitrary units; I center the plot on 100 units of contribution. The level of difficulty of the job changes by 10 units in the flow channel for each step up or down. Please remember that this is a very simple model. Yet it may capture the effective contribution to first order, if Csikszentmihalyi's theory is valid. If we agree on the model, then we also have a notion for how compensation should go as a function of skill level and job difficulty.

Figure 16.9. Effective contribution using Csikszentmihalyi's flow model.


As an example, consider the person represented by the boxed "100". He or she has a contribution level of 100 and is in the flow channel. Assume this person is being paid 100 units for his 100 units of contribution. Compare this with the person outside the channel at the same task level with a contribution equal to 75 units; that person could be outside and at 75 either to the left or the right of the flow channel. If that person's compensation is greater than 75 units, we would consider him overpaid according to this model, as his pay is greater than his contribution. Or, to put it another way, if the person in the channel contributing 100 units and the person outside the channel contributing 75 units are both being paid 85 units, then one is underpaid and the other is overpaid.

This is an interesting way to make comparisons, and one that I have not seen elsewhere.

This ends Part 4. I now move on to "thinking laterally."




The Software Development Edge(c) Essays on Managing Successful Projects
The Software Development Edge(c) Essays on Managing Successful Projects
ISBN: N/A
EAN: N/A
Year: 2006
Pages: 269

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net