1)Written by: Crystal
2)Title of article: Reward employees who work smart
3)Anthor of article: Eric J.Brooks
4)Date of publishment: 28 Jan 2010
5)URL: http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_483064.html
I REFER to the letter “Rewards employees who work smart” written by Eric J. Brooks. In the letter, the writer firstly pointed out that “doing more work in less time” was the core of the problem which PM had come up with in Tuesday’s report. Hence, the protraction of working hours or the growth of employment was useless to increase the productivity. Then he compared the two different working situations in Asian nations and California. He figured out that the working system in California focused more on the productivity while working hours and work style seems more significant in Asian nations. At last, he suggested rewarding employees those who work smarter to build up the new work value.
In my view, I strongly support his opinion. With the rapid development of technology, Singapore has already done a good job in economic growth. However, why did PM still point the low productivity out as a problem in Singapore? It is because that the low productivity in Singapore is not a problem caused by low level of technology but by an antiquated work value, which will have negative effects if not dealt with seriously.
In most Asian countries, working longer and harder represents the better quality of an employee, which affected the productivity seriously and emphasizes a wrong work value. To achieve a “better” quality, employees may spend half a day to finish the work which can be done in two hours. If those employees are rewarded by their “hardworking” and make others follow their examples, the productivity will definitely reduce. Hence, to increase the productivity, the most significant part is to establish a new reward system to encourage the “smarter” workers but not the harder ones. For those who did their work with low efficiency, no matter how harder they work, they should be reconsidered whether they are competent for the job. Also, the employers should make full use of the modern technology and make working more flexible. If the workers have higher efficiency at home or at night, they can be allowed to bring their work home. We should not be the slave of work and so formalistic. Just make working easy and relaxed, maybe we can get a better outcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I can't agree with you more. It is the efficiency that counts, not the amount of time spent. Time is so limited, the only way to be competent for the task is to improve the efficiency and try to do as much work as possible in the given time. When the effeciency is low, to increase the working hours means wasting time. The one who succeed must learn to save every minute.
ReplyDeleteI think that this response is quite good. It reflect the idea clearly. Also, the structure of the sentences ,the fluency and and the grammar are all of high quality.
Strongly agree ! This problem is a common situation around the world . To encourage workers to work hard and increase the production rate , the owners of factories always provide several reward or final year bonus for the most hard-working workers . However , whether the solution of rewarding can solve the problem and improve the production rate can basically depends on how the standard set up . By counting the time that every single worker spends on is no longer a scientific and proper way to measure a worker . Measuring by how much work they do in certain amount of time could be a better to standardize the reward system .
ReplyDeleteJohn