U.S. Office of Personnel Management - Ensuring the Federal Government has an effective civilian workforce

Workforce Performance Resources Newsletter Reprint

Evaluating Awards Programs for Effectiveness

Many kinds of awards programs exist within the Federal Government. Each agency is responsible for designing, operating, and evaluating its own program. Agency evaluators can review their awards program from two broad perspectives:

• Are we doing things right? (i.e., are the process and the rules being followed?), and
• Are we doing the right things? (i.e., what effect does the program have?)

The first perspective is an important one, but this article addresses the second perspective, reviewing the characteristics of an effective awards program and suggesting questions to include in an evaluation of the program.

• Characteristics of Effectiveness.
• Evaluation Questions.

Characteristics of Effectiveness. An awards program should include the following characteristics to be effective:

1. Alignment.
2. Involvement.
3. Variety and Flexibility.
4. Clear Communication.

Alignment. An awards program should align with the organization's mission to encourage employees to achieve desired results, goals, or objectives. An awards program that recognizes individuals and groups who contribute to achieving organizational goals is more likely to be an effective management tool because awards will be more credible, which can prevent charges of favoritism. Agencies should take advantage of the flexibility in the awards regulations to develop awards that support organizational objectives.

Involvement. An awards program should support the partnering of employees, managers, and top executives. An awards program is more effective when everyone involved in the program feels a sense of ownership. In an organized workplace, that is, an agency where employees are represented by a union, involving union representatives in program design is not only a good idea, but could be a statutory obligation. Management has an obligation to notify the union of any proposed awards program or changes to the current program. Providing predecisional involvement to the exclusive representative of the employees in the unionized workplace can assist in a smoother development and transition to a new program.

Variety and Flexibility. Effective awards programs have built-in flexibility and variety that allow them to recognize major accomplishments with substantial awards and lesser accomplishments with smaller awards. An awards program should include a variety of awards as well as be varied enough to meet any budgetary changes. Regulations provide for four basic forms of awards that can be given to Federal employees:

• lump-sum cash awards,
• honorary awards,
• informal recognition awards, and
• time-off awards

An effective awards program maintains a portfolio of these awards so that supervisors may select an award commensurate with the achievement being recognized. Flexibility and variety also enable awards programs to use creativity and to be fun, not routine.

Clear Communication. An awards program should be easily understood. Agencies should use all available communication tools to promote their programs, including publications, electronic messages, award ceremonies, and all-hands meetings. An agency also should publicize the criteria used to choose award recipients, and showcase those employees who receive awards. Clear communication is essential to enlist the support needed to make an awards program effective.

Evaluation Questions. In summary, we recommend that evaluators review the characteristics described above when they assess the effectiveness of their agency's awards program. Evaluations should include these questions:

• Do agency awards support organizational goals?
• Were employees (and their representatives, if applicable) involved in the program's design?
• Do supervisors feel satisfied that the program provides the variety and flexibility they need to recognize employees appropriately?
• Do employees understand award criteria and do they feel that the right people are being recognized?

Originally published on December 1999