During one of my recent morning jogs – it’s amazing the thinking that comes up during those – this question popped up: “Is Recognition an Art or a Science?”.  Obviously this relates to our current focus at Sodexo Motivation Solutions on developing solutions to support organizations in their reward and recognition needs. I was puzzled myself.  The business side of me wants it to be a Science so that we can try to master and provide such expertise to our clients. The other side of me though hopes it is an Art: it is not easy to recognize properly, but when it is done well, what an impact it can achieve.  Still there is no unique recipe to it… So if it is a Science, it has to be an Art also. The Dictionary provided some more insights: Science comes from the Latin for “knowledge” applied in a systematic practice. And Art “is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions”.

I was quite pleased with my compromising answer then to the question: it is both.  But that felt too easy.  The next day I challenged our whole Motivation Solutions team with the question.  The tally of answers was eloquent: we are very accommodating!  13 out of 17 answers felt it is both an Art and a Science; and the other 4 felt it is more an Art.

Some words stood out from the responses.

For the Art: Implementing a “culture of recognition is an art”; it “feeds the needs of the soul” and “it’s meaning is unique to the recipient”; While “there is no unique formula that works every time on every one”, “good managers know instinctively” how to recognize.

For the Science: “true recognition should be based more on fact than emotion”, “be comprehensive and consistent”; it “fulfills our human need for validation” and targets how we “respond to positive recognition”.

This may sum it all: it requires “balance”.

In closing, I’d like hereby to “recognize” our team for all their excellent input, and welcome your comments!