Topics Business

Question I work in a fairly large organization where each year staff are given the opportunity to nominate a colleague for a "staff achievement award". A member of staff in my office is a good candidate for nomination but no-one wants to nominate her (or anyone else) because another member of staff, who doesn't deserve nomination, desperately wants to be nominated - so to avoid an unpleasant situation the staff are not nominating anyone. I don't agree with awards such as this - not just because they cause pain to those who will not be nominated and are unfair anyway because people who do not deserve nomination will be nominated - but because I do not think that anyone deserves an award for a job well done or for being a considerate co-worker or for being exceptional in anyway. Entering competitions in order to win an award is a different matter. What is your opinion?

Accepted:
August 19, 2008

Comments

This sort of case is the best example of a reason why organizations should be very leery of any system of recognition or reward that has the consequence of making its members feel they are subject to invidious comparisons.

Even so, I do think that special effort and special merit also deserves special recognition. A system of nominations is supposed to bring attention to the most deserving cases, and if this system operates properly, then credit goes where credit is due. But, to be perhaps a bit too blunt, it sounds to me as if your co-workers are actually doing your best to make sure this system will not work effectively or fairly, by refusing to take part in it. By refusing to nominate your colleague, you do what is in your power to deny them the recognition they deserve. How can that be right? Instead you and your other co-workers are going to sit idly by and watch someone undeserving get that recognition, because you are unwilling to allow the system to work as it should!

Now I suspect that things have gotten to this point because you and your co-workers suspect that even if you did make an appropriate nomination, the wrong person would be rewarded. So this is a kind of passive resistance to a system you regard as unfair. If that's what's going on, then perhaps a more appropriate response would be for some representative of those who think like this to go (privately and discretely!) to whoever it is who is responsible for making these decisions, explaining to that person why there is so much reluctance to make nominations this year.

Anyway, I really think that the best way to make sure the most deserving candidate gets the appropriate recognition is to nominate that person, and have your co-workers do the same. The one who doesn't deserve it should not win by default, and might learn much of value by being denied the credit they crave. So for heaven's sake don't continue to sit on your hands. If something is broke, fix it!