I usually agree with the Monitor's editorials, and it's rare that I disagree with President Obama, but the March 12 editorial, "Put merit pay on Concord school agenda," has me doing both.

You stated that "systems used to compensate teachers - and administrators - should more closely mirror those in the workplaces of other professionals." But it doesn't work in the private sector!

As an organizational consultant, I have become convinced that - for most - merit pay reduces motivation, lowers productivity and creates a toxic atmosphere. As though that weren't enough to have us question whether we want children in such an environment, it also increases divisiveness and hurts teamwork. Our educators should not be in competition with one another. They should be working together, whenever possible, to create a superior learning environment.

Punishment and reward do not change values. For a few who care about the consequences, it may change behavior. But is that why we want our educators doing a good job? Do we want money to be the prime motivator in teaching and caring for our children? Work ethic and devotion to the job are values based. If we have staff that doesn't meet a reasonable standard, let's put our energy and funds toward proper mentoring, suggesting changes in teacher education and influencing the system where it falls short.

Pay for performance relies on evaluation. As counter-intuitive as this sounds - performance evaluations should be 65 percent about the future. The past and present assessments should be there to inform future goals and plans. The conversation should focus on "What more do you need? What extra training can we provide? Let's get you talking to and mentoring with successful colleagues."

If specific people are not performing well, perhaps it was a hiring mistake. Or, rather than being unmotivated, they are misaligned - i.e. in the wrong profession. Or

perhaps they do not fully understand what is expected of them.

Some years ago, it was discovered that more than half of our nation's employees did not know, clearly, what their supervisors expected from them. (Nearly 100 percent of the supervisors thought their expectations were clear.) Even more people kept secrets from their supervisors because those in charge had a duel role: to both help with problems and to evaluate. When worried that their inadequacies would show up on their evaluations, they chose to keep their concerns to themselves.

That's what fear does. It gets in the way of reasonable dialogue and inquiry. It discourages owning up to mistakes and taking responsibility. It's interesting that those are the values we try to teach our children. Well, blame doesn't work for kids and works even less well for professionals.

Blame-free environment

What about instituting a blame-free work environment where it doesn't matter who is to blame? What matters is what's not working gets fixed. People would be much more willing to come to each other's aid, share what works and what doesn't and collaborate to make their school top notch in every way.

I deliver a rather unpopular talk to educators and parents called, "The Case For The Punishment-Free Environment," in which I ask, "Do you want your children to behave only because they're afraid of getting caught?" Well, merit pay has the same effect. Do we want educators to perform well primarily to avoid the punitive action of reduced pay?

Predictability

With all the issues present in government and education, those sectors have one great advantage. Salaries are posted and based on tenure and job description. They're predictable and don't create a sense of inequality and competition. It allows for focus on providing the needed support to do a good job because it's the ethical and necessary thing to do. When people are not meeting the standards, it may be less of an individual problem and more of a systemic issue.

I strongly disagree with merit pay for educators for the same reasons I don't think it works in other organizations. It's an abdication of our responsibility to supervise well and continually. It takes performance evaluations and assessments out of the developmental process and makes it about percentage pay increase. In my opinion, it is a destructive alternative.

Single page