Skip to main content
Steady at the Top
← All articles

How to motivate employees when you cannot offer raises

When you cannot offer raises, improve the work employees must do and the choices they can make within it. Remove avoidable friction, clarify priorities, and give useful feedback. Be honest about compensation constraints and keep fair pay as a separate responsibility.

A job-friction and choice audit is a working review of the obstacles and unnecessary controls that make a role harder to perform well. It applies self-determination theory, developed by Ryan and Deci and summarized in their 2000 paper, which identifies autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The audit is a practical method rather than a validated psychological measure.

Autonomy concerns meaningful choice within a role. It does not mean freedom from standards or coordination. Recognition acknowledges a contribution. It does not settle whether compensation is fair. Keep those distinctions explicit so an honest improvement effort does not become a cheerful explanation for an unresolved pay problem.

For the compensation-constrained role, apply industrial/organizational psychology, the psychology of work and organizations, to the work arrangement. Identify a specific obstacle or unnecessary approval the manager can change without disguising the unresolved pay decision.

Start with the compensation truth

Explain what you know about raises, what is undecided, and when the company will review the question. Avoid an unsupported promise that everyone will be rewarded later. If you cannot set a review date, say what decision or evidence will make one possible.

Check whether the constraint applies consistently. Employees will notice exceptions, though they may not know the full context. Have the appropriate compensation and people specialists review inequities, contractual obligations, and any employment issues. General motivation guidance cannot determine those requirements.

Do not describe mission, flexibility, or praise as payment. They may improve the job while compensation remains inadequate. An employee can appreciate a better role and still choose another employer. Respect that choice instead of framing departure as insufficient commitment.

Use When do rewards help motivation, and when do they hurt? to distinguish intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The distinction can guide work design, but it should not become an argument that money is irrelevant. You need an accurate account of both the role and the reward arrangement.

The job-friction and choice audit method

1. Follow one real piece of work

Ask an employee to show how a normal assignment moves from request to completion. Observe approvals, missing information, duplicate entry, waiting, and avoidable rework. Start with actual work rather than a broad request for ideas about morale.

Ask where effort produces little useful result. The employee may identify a report no one reads, a decision repeatedly reopened, or a tool that requires manual repair. Check the claim with the relevant process owner before removing a control that serves a necessary purpose.

Include people with different roles and schedules. The friction visible to an executive may differ from the friction affecting a customer-facing employee. Avoid assuming the loudest complaint represents the whole organization.

Record an example and consequence for each issue. “Approval requires two leaders who disagree about the rule” is actionable. “Too much bureaucracy” describes a feeling about the process but leaves the decision unclear.

2. Remove friction you have authority to change

Select obstacles whose removal preserves necessary controls. Eliminate a redundant report after confirming who uses it. Clarify an approval threshold with the accountable owner. Give staff access to maintained information rather than asking them to reconstruct it repeatedly.

Make the change visible. Explain what stops, why, and where a remaining obligation now sits. An employee should not have to guess whether they still need to produce the old output quietly for a senior stakeholder.

Do not create a volunteer project to fix management’s friction on top of a full workload. Allocate time and an owner. If you ask employees to diagnose a process, leadership must decide which findings to act on and what capacity supports the work.

Keep a small unresolved list. Some constraints may require investment the company cannot make now. A clear explanation is preferable to an invitation for ideas that disappears into silence after people spend time contributing.

3. Expand useful choice within clear boundaries

Identify where the outcome requires consistency and where the method can vary. A required quality standard does not always require identical work sequencing. Ask employees which choices would improve their ability to deliver while preserving coordination.

Define the decision boundary. “Choose the method within these security and customer requirements” gives more usable authority than “Be entrepreneurial.” The employee needs to know which decisions are theirs and where consultation remains necessary.

Avoid offering choice only over trivial details. Letting a team select the meeting color while retaining every substantive approval will not address the issue the audit identified. Choose an operating decision that matters to the role.

Use the autonomous-versus-controlled motivation distinction in Deci, Olafsen, and Ryan’s 2017 workplace review when deciding whether the new discretion changes the work or only its description. Apply that distinction cautiously. Useful authority should support the work, rather than disguise pressure to accept more responsibility without support.

4. Improve evidence of progress

Agree on what a good result looks like. Give feedback close enough to the work that the employee can use it. Describe the action, its consequence, and the next adjustment. Avoid relying on a yearly rating to explain expectations that change weekly.

Where work has a long horizon, identify meaningful interim evidence. A team developing a new service may need customer learning and quality milestones before revenue arrives. Choose indicators that inform decisions, rather than manufacturing a celebration for every completed task.

Make learning possible within working time. A development opportunity needs relevant practice, feedback, and room to correct mistakes. Assigning a difficult project without support can increase demand while offering little learning.

Ask the employee whether the feedback helps them act. The test is practical. Can they explain what to continue, what to change, and what decision they now own? If not, make the feedback more concrete.

5. Review whether the role became more workable

Return to the original examples. Did the duplicate work stop? Did the approval boundary hold? Can the employee make the decision you granted? Ask about operating consequences before asking whether morale improved.

When the friction audit exposes an impossible queue, compare its demands with resources and needs using the NIOSH account of job stress. Do not assume better attitude resolves an impossible assignment. If the audit reveals overload, reduce demand or change capacity through the appropriate operating decision.

For symptoms that persist or disrupt daily life, consult a licensed clinician separately from the job-friction audit; a decision about approvals or compensation is not a clinical assessment. The audit addresses management and work design. It is not a diagnostic or treatment process for employees or the CEO.

Keep compensation on its own review path. Report the status accurately even if the work-design changes helped. Employees should not have to reopen the pay discussion because leadership interprets a calmer meeting as proof that the original concern disappeared.

A hypothetical improvement with no new reward budget

A company cannot approve general raises during a cash constraint. Its customer team also spends part of each day copying updates between two reporting systems. Managers repeatedly request status information already available in one of them.

The audit identifies a reporting requirement that can safely stop. Leadership chooses one maintained record and ends the duplicate request. It also lets account owners resolve a defined class of service exceptions without waiting for a manager.

The team now has a clearer decision boundary and less avoidable work. The company has not solved compensation fairness by making those changes. It has improved the job while keeping the pay constraint and review process visible.

This hypothetical example does not promise a motivation outcome. It shows an action leadership can verify without asking employees to report enthusiasm. The useful evidence is that the duplicate work ended and the authority can be used.

The private-life composite

A founder prepares an enthusiastic thank-you speech at home after postponing raises. Their partner asks whether the employees still have to complete the same weekend report the founder privately considers wasteful. The founder realizes that appreciation has become easier to offer than a decision to stop work.

This composite points to a concrete leadership choice. Before drafting the speech, determine who uses the report and whether it can end. If it is necessary, explain why and allocate capacity. If it is unnecessary, remove it and enforce the decision.

The founder can still thank the team. The message becomes more credible when paired with a change employees experience. Recognition should describe the contribution instead of presenting gratitude as a substitute for the raise the company cannot provide.

Address different causes differently

Use Why is team morale low when the business is doing well? when morale is low across a team. A pay constraint, weak management, unclear work, and unfair treatment require different responses. The audit helps identify some operating problems, but it should not become the only explanation leadership accepts.

Use Why a restructuring can feel unfair even when explained to examine fairness during restructuring. An attractive choice for one role can impose coordination costs on another. Ask whose work becomes harder when one employee gains flexibility or authority, and repair that boundary before declaring success.

Keep How CEOs can build motivation that survives hard quarters as the broader guide to employee motivation. The narrow contribution here is a disciplined way to improve the work within current constraints. It should produce decisions about tasks, authority, and feedback that the organization can inspect.

At the next review, name one obstacle removed and one useful choice employees can now exercise. Then state the compensation status accurately. You can improve motivation conditions without pretending the company has resolved every reason people choose to stay.

Explain the limits of the audit

Tell employees which decisions you can make immediately and which require review. An invitation to propose improvements should not imply an unlimited budget or a promise to accept every suggestion. Return with an explicit response to each selected issue. The employee should know whether it changed, remains under review, or cannot change under current constraints.

Sources

Steady at the Top