I work in a big company and tasked with increasing engagement of employees who more or less have settled in their own (not so efficient) ways of doing work.
One of the suggestions on the table is having more team building events to increase the sense of trust and elevate morale among the workers.
A big question is who should pay for such events? in a world of shrinking budgets and reluctance to spend money, management says employees should pay for such events, and employees of course say management should pay. So I am wondering if there is an objective way to resolve this?
On the one hand, you are essentially asking people to be more productive together. And on the other, you are asking them to financially contribute to achieve that. I read similar questions about the effectiveness of team building events and such topics, and I agree that some events are useless and some are not. Some people see it as a waste of time, others thrive on it. I know it really boils down to willingness to participate in such events and gauging the demand for it.
But when push comes to shove, who pays?? Would a 50-50 scheme work? As in, what ever the employees contribute, management will match it. Just wondering!
edit: thank you for everyone for sharing your insight towards this question! I am really happy with some of the answers on here. I am also happy with this website, it has definitely helped in getting a broad view of this topic.