The team needs us!

[gpartin]

Flaming nora, I killed that conversation.

[cherrywarrior]

im not sure just how much bondage I want going on at our club... :eusa18:

[gpartin]

im not sure just how much bondage I want going on at our club... :eusa18:

eh?

[cherrywarrior]

Matthew picks up on a good point - bondage.

Steady! I think that's still an unfounded rumour.

sorry, see above for further clarification!

[gpartin]

Aaaah sorry read that earlier as well lol...

[gpartin]

Agreed.

My dad has a very good book on human psychology called "How the Mind Works" and Noble should get a copy and read it.

Has anyone ever been in the situation in a job where the company decides to introduce incentives?

I don't have the book to hand but take this as an example:


4 week sales incentive - most improved salesman wins an ipod

Lets say there are three types of people in every job and 99 people in the office.

(i)33 x Mr Dependable, takes a pride in his work, always gives 100%, sets himself targets above and beyond what is expected of him.

(ii)33 x Mr Justinuff, consistently hits his sales targets but never exceeds them. Does what is expected of him and nothing more.

(iii)33 x Mr Bus, regularly late for work, misses targets more often than not.

Now Mr Dependable can't possibly improve, Mr Justinuff can improve slightly and Mr Bus has massive room for improvement so no surprises who wins the ipod.

1 x Mr Bus is presented with his ipod in front of the 98 other staff members. Your manager is pleased that sales have increased, everybody claps and gets back to work.

What happens next in an office with 1 happy Mr Bus, 32 x Mr Bus's and 33 Mr Justinuffs disappointed because they improved their sales and didn't win and 33 Mr Dependables Down right annoyed that they work hard all year and Mr Bus wins the ipod?

Thats right, you end up with 33 Mr Justinuffs and 66 Mr Bus's. Mr Bus who won the ipod does as little as always and waits for the next incentive to come along.

Now there is a lot more to this book than this simplistic example but I think you get the point.

If anyone read this and didn't get it, think how you would feel as a hard working player when Stuart Fielden gets paid more than anyone else, plays crap and gets picked anyway. Or when Phelps does nothing, then plays one decent game and gets coaches Man of the Match.

Noble has indirectly knocked the desire to win out of our players and unless he picks players on performance and attitude, all the omelettes in Britain won't improve us.

[cpwigan]

From what I know you certainly get an if he's getting paid X he needs to put up to that value or at least you did do. Also team win bonuses meant you had to all do your bit for the team to get the bonus.

[gpartin]

From what I know you certainly get an if he's getting paid X he needs to put up to that value or at least you did do. Also team win bonuses meant you had to all do your bit for the team to get the bonus.

You certainly do and the problem is in Rugby the difference between the highest and lowest paid is huge so the potential for poor attitudes developing at the lower end is multiplied.

[exile in Tiger country]

Agreed.

quote]

If anyone read this and didn't get it, think how you would feel as a hard working player when Stuart Fielden gets paid more than anyone else, plays crap and gets picked anyway. Or when Phelps does nothing, then plays one decent game and gets coaches Man of the Match.Noble has indirectly knocked the desire to win out of our players and unless he picks players on performance and attitude, all the omelettes in Britain won't improve us.

If he was the best player in that match, he deserves man of the match, thats why the "of the match" bit is there, otherwise it would be "Of the month" or "Of the last few games".
I'm not saying he's a great player, but the name of the award is the clue.

[gpartin]

Agreed.

quote]

If anyone read this and didn't get it, think how you would feel as a hard working player when Stuart Fielden gets paid more than anyone else, plays crap and gets picked anyway. Or when Phelps does nothing, then plays one decent game and gets coaches Man of the Match.Noble has indirectly knocked the desire to win out of our players and unless he picks players on performance and attitude, all the omelettes in Britain won't improve us.

If he was the best player in that match, he deserves man of the match, thats why the "of the match" bit is there, otherwise it would be "Of the month" or "Of the last few games".
I'm not saying he's a great player, but the name of the award is the clue.

I understand that but I thought his MOM was given for a performance that was good relative to how he normally plays. He certainly wasn't my choice of Man of the match,