“Loyalty Needs No Favors?”

Thanks to all of you who took time to comment on my “how to reward loyalty” blog. All the observations were well thought-out, and many of them had interesting takeaways. Rather than imposing my own views, I would like to leave you all with yet another dimension of approaching debate topics…

Sometimes, it is not necessary that pros and cons of a debate topic have to be at loggerheads. Such as, in this case, perhaps the best way to reward loyalty is NOT to reward loyalty?! To appreciate this contradictory statement, one needs to get down to the basics and do a cause and effect analysis.

Emphasis on Loyalty arrow Frustration for relative new comers arrow Departure of performers amongst new comers arrow Drought of performers at the top in the long run arrow Company stops doing well arrow Opportunities to reward employees start drying up arrow Departure of loyalists arrow Company concentrated with job hoppers!!

Emphasis on Performance arrow Frustration of non-performing loyalists arrow Their departures replaced by upcoming performers arrow Top tier is concentrated with performers arrow Company starts performing better arrow Growth rewards trickle down to employees arrow Retention of employees arrow Company concentrated with loyalists!!!

For the record, Cybage has never given “Loyalty” any weightage in its appraisal parameters. Isn’t it ironical then that many of Cybage’s top-tier employees actually started their professional career with the organization?

Original, Team, Loyalty, Style


  1. Good equations!!!
    Can’t we achieve both ‘loyalty’ and ‘performance’ with single resource and which would be ideal for organization! The process/approach might be like

    Only Loyal -> Proper guidelines/directions -> Hard work -> Both Loyal and Performer

    Only Performer -> Rewards -> Retention -> Both Performer and Loyal

    Though in both these approaches we could have fair chances of success and failure, but then also I would like to go with these two or might be some more approaches to achieve both loyalty and performance with ‘single resource’ rather carrying two different resources.

  2. I believe that the orgainzation should have its primary focus on the Performers rather than the Loyal. Because ‘Only Loyal’ is not of much use unless he/she performs, while the good performers are always fruitfull for the oraginzation from top to bottom of the business.
    Rather than rewarding ‘Only Loyalty’ the organization should reward the ‘Loyalty of Performers’.

  3. I also agree with what kiran had commented above. Why to choose between the loyal and performer, we should focus on how to convert both to a loyal performer. Because organization does not need a loyal who does not performing after given him or her many opportunities to perform or a performer who perform but leaves the organization. As an organization, its aim should be to find the link between both performance and loyalty. Every Organization aims to achieve its goals, which can come only if its employees perform. Hence an organization should believe in performers and should try to change them to loyal performer.
    This can be achieved by rewarding, motivating and appreciating the performer for its contribution for the organization. I know it’s difficult to change them, but proper monitoring of work can help to link loyalty and performance.
    A performer is motivated if its performance is noticed. Hence monitoring an individual’s performance is an option to convert a performer into a loyal performer.

  4. 2 cents from my side,

    Many experts are writing about how Loyalty can be given more importance within a company, considering loyalist working for the success of the company.

    This is not always the case. The main reason—human nature being what it is—is that loyalist are motivated first by their own objectives and only secondarily by the goals of the company. In other words, even if they have basically the same goals (i.e., the goals of the company they work for), loyalist will work primarily based on their own priorities.
    Some are looking to build a reputation for themselves, and others simply want to get the job done and go home.
    In other words, loyalist may not in fact be able to contribute in order to attain the objectives of the company when it comes to provide cutting edge solutions because of their own nature. It’s an internal problem that only one can fix. There come the so called Job Hoppers…who love the technology not the job…..:)

  5. Amidst the chaos that we have seen around the subject of Corruption in past one year, one day I happened to ask one of my mentors: “What stops one from being corrupt?” & the answer was “either Lack of Opportunities or Fear of Failure (i.e. getting caught).” I was stunned for a moment but when started applying the same principle to a set of examples, it seemed so right.
    We may choose to agree or may not but this applies to most of us too.
    “The Loyal (non performer)” either undermines the Opportunity or doesn’t have enough self-belief to go after it. But that’s not for us to worry about. As an organization, more important question is where is the opportunity? “Inside or Outside”.
    “What are we doing to create more opportunities?” as loyalty is a function of opportunity.
    A good organization would never want a loyal that’s not doing well professionally & personally, would it? And at the same time, we shouldn’t be expecting “Loyalty” without reasonable returns.
    At the end we must admit that “Loyalty is earned & nothing comes for free in this world.” Also, we can’t provide acting classes for someone’s interest. Lol !!

  6. I think the solution to this debate is not very difficult as it seems. According to me the solution is “We need to appreciate (not reward) the loyalists for their loyalty in front of new performers and reward & appreciate performers in front of non performing loyalists.” I am sure this will do the trick and make a lot of difference.

  7. I disagree. A strong emphasis of performance over loyalty is only possible when you have the financial backing to continuously pay high performers. Small firms without great financial backing don’t have that luxury. So, in such cases, loyalty definitely matters just as much. In fact, even in very large firms, including RIL, there is a kitchen cabinet of loyalists that stand alongside professionals to run the firm.

  8. I agree with you sir !!!

Leave your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


“Loyalty Needs No Favors?” - Arun Nathani Blog