Nordstrom's Performance Goals: This Case Focuses On The Issu

Nordstroms Performance Goalsthis Case Focuses On The Issue Of Perform

Nordstrom's performance management system emphasizes clear and effective goals to enhance employee performance, reduce role conflict and ambiguity, and improve performance evaluations. The company's central performance goal is delivering extraordinary service, which directly translates into extraordinary sales volume and profits. To sustain this, Nordstrom employs a comprehensive approach that includes defining performance standards, measuring outcomes, providing feedback, rewarding achievements, and correcting underperformance. This integrated framework ensures that all employees work towards a unified objective: exceptional customer service that fuels financial success.

Implementing a culture of openness, Nordstrom makes employees' sales figures publicly accessible, fostering transparency and healthy competition. The open environment encourages associates to monitor their performance relative to peers, motivating continuous improvement. Such transparency enhances motivation through social comparison, fuels a sense of accountability, and encourages employees to strive for their personal best by benchmarking against top performers.

In addition to transparency, Nordstrom employs a bi-monthly reinforcement schedule by releasing sales figures and rewarding top performers. While this strategy effectively recognizes achievements and motivates high achievers, it may not be optimal for all employees or circumstances. Reinforcement schedules in organizational settings can be broadly classified into continuous, fixed ratio, fixed interval, variable ratio, and variable interval schedules. The bi-monthly reward system predominantly aligns with a fixed interval schedule, where reinforcement occurs after a predetermined period. This schedule can motivate employees to sustain performance over the interval, but may also lead to potential drawbacks such as performance dips immediately before rewards or reduced motivation outside the reward period.

Alternative reinforcement strategies could involve more frequent, variable schedules, such as ongoing recognition, daily or weekly feedback, or spot awards. For instance, implementing a variable ratio schedule—rewards given unpredictably based on certain performance criteria—could enhance motivation through anticipation and excitement. Such strategies are known to foster sustained engagement and effort, as employees are motivated not just by the reward but by the unpredictability of reinforcement, which sustains their performance over time. Therefore, a mixed approach combining scheduled rewards with spontaneous recognitions can optimize motivation across different employee profiles and job contexts.

Personally, I have observed reinforcement schedules in retail environments that varied in effectiveness. For example, a momentary recognition program involved rewarding sales associates immediately after exceeding daily targets with small incentives or acknowledgments. This approach, a form of a fixed ratio schedule, often motivated employees to increase their efforts to obtain quick rewards. However, it sometimes led to short-term focus rather than long-term customer service excellence. Conversely, programs that incorporated periodic recognition—such as weekly top salesperson awards—maintained motivation but lacked immediacy and impact, highlighting the importance of timing and variability in reinforcement schedules.

In sum, while Nordstrom's bi-monthly sales-based rewards foster a high-performance, competitive environment, incorporating more frequent, variable, and personalized reinforcement strategies could further enhance motivation and performance sustainability. As organizations aim to maximize employee engagement and productivity, understanding and deploying diverse reinforcement schedules aligned with specific job roles and employee dispositions is vital for achieving long-term success.

References

• Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627–668.
• Kanfer, R. (1990). Motivation theory and industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational Psychology (pp. 75–170). Consulting Psychologists Press.
• Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485–516.
• Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The Motivation to Work. Wiley.
• Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. Macmillan.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67.
• Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 363–423.
• Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
• Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A control-theory approach to human behavior. Springer.