Recognition and Performance: Another 2×2 table

I had an interesting chat with my son that ended up turning into a decent coaching session. Conventional wisdom is that you aren’t supposed to coach your family, but it turns out that’s really difficult. Before I was a certified executive coach, I coached hockey, cross country and baseball, and you guessed it – my first (and frankly best) client was my son. To be honest, I think my kids actually prefer my parenting style following coaching training – I use more open ended questions, let them talk 80% of the time, don’t give opinions or advice without permission, and generally just play “mental sparring partner” while they process out loud and figure stuff out for themselves. So, while I concur that there can be ethical and relationship lines one might cross with officially coaching family members as if they were any other client, a coach-like manner of inquiry and dialogue generally works well with folks, family included. 

Remember that “should” or “ought” are red flags that we have a gap between expectations and reality.

Getting back to the actual point…it’s graduation time. Inevitably this time brings great change and opportunity to provide space for the processing of serious emotional content. This is not a one size fits all life event: individual reactions include celebration and joy, but also relief as well as fear for the future. For some there  also comes some disappointment.  There is more to this day for many than simply the handing over of a piece of paper certifying completion of a course of education/training. There is the cultural rite of passage aspect, and the gathering (or failing to gather) together one’s family; with all the attendant potential for joy and pride as well as pressure, awkwardness and bitterness. 

In my son’s case there was some processing going on about the granting of awards, scholarships, recognition of class rank, honors tassels to be worn with graduation robes.  For the sake of privacy and decorum, the specifics aren’t vital to our discussion. Suffice to say that my son and his friends had some questions and consternation about who received recognition and who didn’t.  Having served a career in the military, I was reminded that the appropriate granting of awards has always been an area of contention in organizations. I’d wager, with odds, that nearly all servicemembers have a story or a memory of someone (themselves potentially) that had a mismatch in the award they received and what that person (or others in their sphere) thought was appropriate. 

When you read that last sentence, did you feel like I intentionally and conspicuously avoided the word “should” or “ought”?   

Remember that “should” or “ought” are red flags that we have a gap between expectations and reality. I avoided using the word as a mental exercise to minimize my own consternation with not being able to bend reality to my will, but you are quite observant to note that the fundamental problem in the mismatch of award and awardee is an opportunity to spot  “shouldy” thinking. 

Of course it would be easy to simply shout platitudes at my son, his friends, fellow servicemembers and anyone else with an opinion on the subject that 

1. Awards don’t matter, Intrinsic motivation is the key
2. Move on and get over it

Telling humans to simply ignore a core piece of their psychology and nature is akin to giving feedback that translates roughly to “Stop Sucking, Be More Better”.

As a human generally, and one who has experienced the confusion and disappointment of “award performance mismatch”, I have an impolite suggestion as to where you can place those bits of advice. As much as we intellectualize, and can rationalize that external recognition/validation is lower on the hierarchy of motivation than intrinsic values, we remain emotional animals who enjoy and thrive on external recognition and validation. It is definitely problematic if we only rely on extrinsic motivation, but to deny its importance is to delude ourselves. Telling humans to simply ignore a core piece of their psychology and nature is akin to giving feedback that translates roughly to “Stop Sucking, Be More Better”.  And as much as we might want everyone to “Get Over It” and deal with negative occurrences by moving out smartly to pursue their best self, that is a process, not an event. If it were so easy to “Just Get Over It” people would; few people prefer to wallow in negativity if they can figure out a way to be happy. However, skipping the negative emotions to just be happy invalidates a piece of our humanity. Your limbic system is part of your brain hardware, and provided an important evolutionary advantage. It does tend to over-focus on the negatives, but in doing so provides us (and our ancestors) with a tendency to avoid getting dead. We owe respect and an acknowledgement that this “lizard brain” is intrinsic to us specifically and our humanity generally. Our cortex and higher brain functions work in concert with our negativity and fears by providing context, explanation and processing. We can’t simply wish the bad feelings away without dealing with them. Let’s face it: it flat out sucks to have performed admirably, with excellence, diligence and perseverance resulting in high achievement and not be recognized for it. What if we must watch someone else that didn’t do all those things be recognized publicly?  When we receive an award that we don’t feel we deserve, do we intrinsically know it even if we don’t admit it out loud? We know someone else outworked us, outplayed us, outperformed us but by circumstance, bias, corruption or indifference in the process they did not get recognized.  We are forced to wonder at the cause of something we correctly identify as fundamentally unfair. 

Let’s face it: it flat out sucks to have performed admirably, with excellence, diligence and perseverance resulting in high achievement and not be recognized for it.

Rather than just scoff and say “Get Over It”, I’d like to provide a roadmap to help process these mismatches effectively. I feel a 2×2 table coming on…

2×2 tables…this is another one of those topics that is so massively useful that it precipitates rants at our house that will earn the “old man shouts at clouds” designation from my daughter.  No matter…I’ll still consider teenage eye-rolling as an inverse correlate with middle aged blog quality.

One of the more famous examples is the so called Eisenhower matrix comparing Urgency with Importance. Steven Covey made this a key piece of his seven habits, and it’s a staple of one of my blog posts about prioritization, time and stress management during the holidays (click here to check it out). The technique has good applicability to our conundrum about awards and whether they are earned or deserved. So let’s make that a 2×2. 

Across the top we have “Awarded” vs “Not Awarded”

On the left side top to bottom we have “superior performance” vs “inadequate performance”

Drawing it out we have 4 quadrants from the intersection of these characteristics. 

In the top left there are folks who were awarded appropriately, as a result of superior achievement or effort. The bottom right are folks who were not awarded (appropriately so) as a result of inadequate achievement or sub par effort.  Do either of these quadrants bother you?

Generally the answer I get from clients is “no”.  People seem to think that getting their due, and others getting their due is intuitively good, or at least reasonable. Whether it appeals to a sense of fairness or justice, I generally get the response that these quadrants that are “matched” aren’t the problem. Most of the folks I’ve discussed this with even go so far as to say that they are pleased when folks end up in these 2 quadrants, no matter where they personally ended up…i.e. people with a mismatch personally or with a close friend/colleague that has a mismatch in performance and recognition aren’t upset at the people that got awarded, so long as they are awarded appropriately. Despite my usual cynical take, these interactions have given me at least a little evidence that there is some desire for fairness and justice somewhere in our nature. 

Getting back to the problem at hand…

How about the upper right quadrant, with people who were not awarded/recognized despite a superior performance?  This is usually the one that comes up in coaching chats, and probably the one that causes the most consternation when it happens to you. The final quadrant (lower left) in which people receive awards that appear unearned is also irritating. Many times the irritation arises in situations in which (as the saying goes) they personally don’t have a dog in the fight. 

Let’s focus on these two quadrants, since they are the ones that tend to elicit problematic emotional responses. 

I asked my son to describe what he had control over in the situation. In particular the parameters of the 2×2 matrix, i.e. the award being granted, or the effort/performance to be potentially recognized.  The answer is obvious – you only have control over your own effort/performance.  The award is out of your hands. Next question: Which of the discordant quadrants would he prefer?  Of course, nearly everyone with a sense of justice, fairness and integrity would prefer that the whole world be placed neatly into either the upper left or lower right, or the “concordant quadrants” for shorthand. But, if it’s between a great performance and effort that goes unrecognized, and receiving recognition for being lackluster, and you had to choose, which would you pick?  He said he’d prefer to work hard, achieve great things and make an impact, and not receive an award, rather than receive an award for not accomplishing any of those things.  

PoP Quiz Hot Shot…you can choose external reward, or being true to your values and character strengths. What do you do? 

What happened? How did two questions get him on a path to processing something that is legitimately irritating and fundamentally unfair? Full disclosure, this wasn’t some magical transformation that occurred in the 3 minutes it took to ask him the questions and give him time to answer them. It was the start of a gain in perspective. 

I consider the first question a nice Jedi mind trick to get folks thinking like Stoics. Specifically the stoic principle that pretty much everything outside of your response, choice and effort is 100% out of your control. Better to realize this than tilt at windmills.  The second question is a subtle nudge to help realize the relative importance of intrinsic motivation vs extrinsic motivation. I could tell my clients “hey, quit grumbling, intrinsic motivation and doing your best simply because it’s right and noble is more important than the acquisition of dust collectors for your shelf and public recognition…harumph!”; I’d rather pose the question and let them figure it out. I’m not arguing to invalidate awards, external recognition and extrinsic motivation. I acknowledge that it would be preferable to do great things, and be recognized. However when comparing the “problematic quadrants” in any 2×2 table exercise, the key is how you value the different factors, and what is the resultant prioritization. Extrinsic motivation and external reward are great, but so is remaining true to your values and making the most of your character strengths. (Intrinsic motivation!). How do you prioritize them in importance? How do you choose to respond? 

PoP Quiz Hot Shot…you can choose external reward, or being true to your values and character strengths. What do you do?  

…what if your client says they would prefer to be awarded and not have earned it, rather than have displayed excellence without being recognized?

The 2×2 table exercise is a mental force function. It inevitably resolves to a “Which of these two factors goes first, and which goes second?” The first step in deciding what is more important, is to ask the damn question. The choice isn’t between important and unimportant, because we start the discussion by acknowledging that the two concordant quadrants are where we wish everyone shook out. Once we embrace the reality that the  discordant quadrants exist, and that we control only one factor, we’ve taken the first step.  After that, we can assess the relative value of the factor we don’t control, and begin to process our initial negative response. Of course people would prefer to be awarded for what they did! Most people when pressed say that they’d prefer to be competent and excel, rather than be incompetent/or average. Ask them why; they’ll begin to discover that intrinsic motivation is more important to them. 

Another benefit to this approach to process is that it engenders a commitment to award others appropriately. 

Think of it this way: if you convinced someone to “Get Over It”, extrinsic rewards don’t matter”,  when they ascend to a leadership position, how well will they advocate for their team to get recognition for their specific laudable behavior/contributions? There’s definitely a difference between saying that intrinsic motivation is more important, and  saying that extrinsic motivation is unimportant. 

Another interesting thought…what if your client says they would prefer to be awarded and not have earned it, rather than have displayed excellence without being recognized?

What does this reveal about their priorities, values, and motivations? 

The value of the 2×2 exercise still stands even if this answer is given…because a self-realization that this is how a person prioritizes these factors is the first step in exploring what that means for their work ethic, dedication, and how they will approach awards and recognition if they are in a leadership position. 

Thoughts?

Did I oversimplify the concept, or is a 2×2 a viable approach to force some deeper thought and decision making?