Page 46
intelligence
THE PRIZE FIGHT
Healthy competition should be encouraged, but too much can be a dangerous thing
Many firms use competition as a way of driving performance. Sales personnel have monthly objectives, call-centre staff must hit hourly targets and in some firms making a significant sale causes public and triumphant rejoicing. At an extreme, hyper-competitive smart-suited testosterone-fuelled young men on city trading floors shouting and punching the air are archetypal images seared into the collective public consciousness. But is competition helpful?
Competitive spirit can be an advantage when there is an external ‘enemy’. Jack Welsh, for example, was famous for creating competitive pressures at GE; an external competitor to be ‘fought’ improved profitability, but people fought each other internally to ensure their own survival.
In contrast, while firms like McKinsey have an ‘up or out’ rule (it is said that 20 per cent of its consultants leave the firm each year), its people work very hard to be successful and continue to be loyal alumni of McKinsey and cooperate with former colleagues even after they leave. But this managed competition, a sophisticated long-term organisational harnessing of individual ambition, is unusual.
Competition can bring out the best in people; we can all recount favourite sporting events where competition has created outstanding and memorable performances. The danger is that an exciting competitive spirit can be maladaptive; competitive extroversion can be a healthy source of energy – or, at an extreme, ‘over the top’ – and even alienate colleagues and customers.
For example, if there is excessive competition then organisational citizenship behaviour can decrease; knowledge can be hoarded, at best traded, and worst not shared at all; and power and survival, status and pecking order become all important. There can be individual consequences. We know that people who are aggressive, and perhaps exhibit Type A behaviour, are more prone to burnout, illness and even injuries. As well as there being an increased risk of heart attack, there is also a possible correlation with illnesses such as cancer and even serotonin uptake. Conversely, people who have low anxiety are more likely to promote relationships based on trust, which can often prove to be more sustainable.
Age may have an effect and there may be differences in the way men and women react. People’s focus can also change - when identity is more secure and stable or when other interests such as family come to the fore, organisational competitive desires may decline. In the family firm, this is the stage of succession and replacement.
Things have shifted: social networking means staff may have a broader and personally important network outside the organisation than within it. Social networks rely on co-operation and social standing depends on contribution; direct competition is rarely applauded here.
As ever, there is a mix of desires, temperaments, traits and circumstances, and each organisation is a unique conglomeration. Competition in the service of the firm can be helpful and the wise manager knows it needs understanding and managing. Culture, context and a time horizon are key.
Mind over matter: PSYCHOLOGIST RICHARD KWIATKOWSKI
To contact RICHARD KWIATKOWSKI, a chartered psychologist and senior lecturer in organisational psychology at the Cranfield School of Management, email
richard.kwiatkowski@
cranfield.ac.uk >>
www.som.cranfield.ac.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52