Social comparison activates internal motivation levers in a way that no bonus can. We all have what we like to call an internal compass pointing the magnetic north of performance. Unless we misuse it...
Comparing is like a refrain constantly playing in the background of each organization. We are naturally tempted to compare ourselves to others in order to assess our worth. Is this a good thing? Should the comparison between employees be encouraged, ignored or repressed?
The answer that leaders have to this question dictates the culture of the entire organization and has a strong impact on the cohesion and performance of the company.
Why do people compare themselves to others?
In short: because they can't help it. And for very good reason. The need to relate to one another is deeply rooted in our DNA. Everyone does it. The managers from your organization are doing it. Your colleagues are doing it. You are doing it.
Social comparison is like an internal compass, an intrinsic impulse, always active, which pushes us to evaluate our actions and our place in the group as compared to others. Comparing to others is an important part of how we come to know ourselves, a way we become aware of our potential and resources, but also of the things that we need to improve.
But as strong as the comparison is in motivating our progress, so destructive it can be in the wrong context. Gossip, undermining of colleagues, excessive competition, race for bonuses or constant negotiation for higher wages - all are side effects of an unbalanced compass, which causes us to wrongly compare ourselves to others.
What happens in organizations?
Organizational opacity and the tendency to suppress social comparison aren't helpful. When companies ignore this need and are not transparent about their performance criteria and paths to success, employees will look for their own ways to compare themselves to others using practical benchmarks: who has the highest paycheck? who has the biggest office? who is the boss's favorite? A large part of the employees' current complaints relate to the social comparison and not to the economic factor itself.
On the other hand, the emphasis on social comparison doesn't do any good either. Even if it produces visible results in a short time, it creates a micro-climate in which individual competition overshadows other internal goals. Collaboration and common purpose disappear, and all that's left is… who gets to be the better one.
Therefore, a company should point employees the "magnetic north" of performance, so then they can use their own to find it. Comparison, as a motivating factor at work, can only work well in an organizational context that provides clear benchmarks and evaluation criteria and that promotes individual and team success as a value in itself.
