You agreed to do this job! So why aren't you happy about it?
Over my years in the IT industry I have worn many hats. From hands on coder to project or even department lead. During this time, I’ve come to realize that building resilient relationships with employees isn’t a one-dimensional challenge. I want to introduce a framework I call the Accomplishment Triangle. It outlines three key dimensions that I believe are essential to fostering productive and enduring work relationships:
The core idea here is simple: while you might initially convince someone to join your team with a strong offering in one area, building a lasting, mutually satisfying relationship requires that at least two of these three dimensions are well-supported (and over the long term you have to cover all three, but we'll get to that). For example, if the prestige associated with a role is lower, high compensation combined with substantial agency might still keep the employee engaged and productive.
How come you picked exactly those three words? I get asked from time to time. The shortest answer might be because in my brain the terms are good enough. After thinking about it myself, I have come up with what must have happened in the background.
To my mind compensation, agency and prestige are completely disjoint terms. This means, if I use them as abstractions to fill them in with nuance and meaning when I need to, I won't be stumbling over myself. Stuff that is countable rewards goes into compensation, stuff that is about doing things and owning one's actions goes into agency. The fanfare, coolness, stuff you might want to tell people about your job etc. That stuff goes into prestige.
Fair question. For one I do apply this to myself quite often. On another hand, from the perspective of a person managing other persons, it can come in handy to keep track of how things develop over time. Whether you do it transparently with your people or just as a backoffice kind of track keeping is up to You. I've had good results confronting people with the model. In the end the model helps you maintain the machine that is your team. We are all cogs of some sort, if any one of those three dimensions is below its minimum the cog is out of balance and the machine experiences friction.
One thing that is often missed at this point, only one of those three dimensions is can actually help increase organizational output. Agency. If your team needs to do more with less, you need Agency. Need to expand? Agency. Need to fix that flaky success rate? Someone taking up more agency might help! Depending on the situation agency is either something you pay or something that actually pays you. This is not only a model to keep staff happy (or your self-check-in), it is a model that can help you navigate organizational change and challenges!
It’s important to stress that the Accomplishment Triangle is not a mechanism but a foundational framework. The terminology and weight of each dimension can and should vary based on your surroundings and I won't even try to dictate what specifics go where. Here are some aspects to keep in mind when using this model:
Oversimplification of Motivation: Employee motivation is complex. While compensation, agency, and prestige are vital, factors such as work-life balance, job security, intrinsic passion for the work, and company culture also play significant roles. Prestige will happily consume most of those aspects in my experience but things like company culture might be a bit more difficult. Culture in itself is a topic worth tomes but here I would leave it like this: I have to assume that we are talking about a respectful culture. In my mind anything other than respectful turns to some sort of systematic dysfunction all too soon. Getting back to motivation, I've come to understand that motivation is invariant to which flavor of respectful culture.
Substitutability Isn’t Always Linear: The idea that excellence in any two dimensions can compensate for a lack in the third is appealing, but in reality, these factors often interact in non-linear ways. For instance, insufficient compensation may not be fully offset by high agency and prestige. Now in order to get a productive relationship started you can start a professional engagement in a way that falls short in one dimension but makes up in the other two, but in the long run you will have to own up and get the employee sorted on all three dimensions for the relationship to stay fruitful for all.
Ambiguity in Terms: What constitutes “agency” or “prestige” can be subjective. The level of autonomy or external recognition that motivates one person might not have the same effect on another, so these terms require clear definition based on one's surroundings when the framework gets used. And this is by design.
Dynamic and Evolving Needs: Priorities change over the course of a career. Early on, individuals might be drawn to roles that offer high agency and prestige as they build their reputation, while later in life, factors like job stability and work-life balance might become more important. And if that wasn't enough, professional development also happens, whether you want it or not (and you better want it for your people!). So it is crucial to reflect on an employees Achievement Triangle and make adjustments where needed. It is either this or people leave or quiet quit on you. So if you are going to track something like this, iterate!
Cultural and Individual Variances: Different industries, organizational cultures, and personal values mean that not everyone will weigh these dimensions equally. What works as a motivational mix for one team may need adjustment for another.
The Accomplishment Triangle is not a one-size-fits-all, not a one-stop-shop kind of thing. Rather, it is a starting point for understanding and structuring employee engagement, or a tool to keep track of your own, personal engagement metrics as a self-reflective exercise.
I think it is clear by now but: When using this framework, it’s crucial to adapt the terminology and emphasis to fit your specific context. Consider it a lens, a way to prompt discussion and reflection, rather than a rigid rulebook. As with any model, acknowledging its limitations is key. By remaining aware of potential pitfalls and continuously refining your approach based on the unique needs of your team, you can better navigate the challenges of building a productive and resilient workplace.
How do you balance these dimensions in your own work environment? Share your thoughts or get in touch!
