“You just made a big mistake”, Matt told Marie. Marie is the CEO of a multinational manufacturing Company. She heads the regional office that covers Rwanda, South Sudan and Burundi. The operation in Rwanda made a profit of over forty percent in 2023 while South Sudan and Burundi made loses. The mistake Matt (General Manager in Rwanda) was highlighting was- staff in Rwanda were not paid bonus on the premise that their regional counterparts had failed. As we come close to 2024, Rwanda has mediocre performance. The office has lost its best talent while the under performers are protected by their bosses.
The above is a true story with with names and jurisdictions changed to protect the Company. I usually tell leaders that performance punishment is like removing umbrella from a smart person who bought it with their money only to give it to some dirty person who has never owned an umbrella. The act is demeaning with far reaching consequences.
In the modern workplace, where meritocracy is often touted as the driving force behind success, a disturbing trend has emerged: the phenomenon of performance punishment. This paradoxical practice occurs when high-performing employees are consistently burdened with additional responsibilities and workload while underperforming colleagues are left relatively unscathed. The dynamics of performance punishment not only undermine the principles of fairness and equity but also amount to a form of harassment that can have severe consequences for both the individual and the organsation.
At the heart of performance punishment lies a flawed system that rewards mediocrity and penalizes excellence. When top performers consistently deliver outstanding results, they inadvertently set a high bar for themselves. Managers and supervisors, recognizing their capabilities, begin to pile on additional tasks and projects, assuming that these individuals can handle the extra workload. However, this assumption fails to consider the limitations of human capacity and the need for work-life balance.
As a result, high performers find themselves trapped in a vicious cycle of ever-increasing demands and responsibilities. They are expected to maintain their exceptional standards while taking on the workload of their less productive colleagues. This unequal distribution of work not only leads to burnout and stress but also fosters resentment among top performers who feel exploited and undervalued.
Moreover, performance punishment can be seen as a form of harassment, as it creates a hostile and discriminatory work environment. When individuals are singled out and burdened with excessive workloads simply because of their competence, it sends a message that their efforts are not appreciated but rather taken for granted. This can lead to feelings of demoralization, decreased job satisfaction, and a sense of being unfairly targeted.
The signs of performance punishment are often subtle but pervasive. High performers may find themselves working longer hours, taking on additional projects without proper compensation, and being held to higher standards than their peers. They may also experience a lack of recognition for their contributions, as their exceptional performance becomes the expected norm rather than a cause for celebration.
Furthermore, performance punishment can have detrimental effects on an organization’s overall productivity and morale. When top performers feel overburdened and undervalued, they may become disengaged and less motivated to maintain their high standards. This can lead to a decline in the quality of work and a loss of valuable talent as high performers seek opportunities elsewhere.
To combat the damaging effects of performance punishment, organizations must foster a culture that values and rewards excellence while ensuring a fair distribution of workload. This requires a shift in mindset from viewing top performers as workhorses to recognizing them as valuable assets deserving of support and development.
Managers and leaders should regularly assess workload distribution and ensure that responsibilities are allocated based on individual capabilities and capacity. They should also provide adequate resources, support, and recognition to high performers, acknowledging their contributions and ensuring that they are not overburdened.
Additionally, organizations should implement systems to identify and address instances of performance punishment. This can include regular check-ins with employees, anonymous feedback mechanisms, and clear guidelines for workload distribution. By proactively addressing these issues, organizations can create a more equitable and supportive work environment that encourages excellence and prevents harassment.
In conclusion, performance punishment is a pervasive and damaging phenomenon that undermines the principles of fairness and equity in the workplace. By recognizing the signs of this paradoxical practice and taking steps to address it, organizations can foster a culture that truly values and rewards excellence while preventing the harassment and burnout of their top performers. Only by creating a supportive and inclusive work environment can organizations unlock the full potential of their workforce and achieve sustainable success.
