---
id: "question-rewarding-collective-activities"
type: "open-question"
source_timestamps: ["§ How to Develop Bridgers", "¶25"]
tags: ["compensation", "hr-strategy"]
related: ["concept-bridger", "action-zigzag-careers"]
resolutionPath: "Case studies or frameworks detailing specific compensation models, KPI adjustments, or performance-review rubrics that successfully incentivize and measure 'bridging' behaviors without relying solely on individual heroics."
source_url: "https://hbr.org/2026/03/why-great-innovations-fail-to-scale"
source_title: "Why Great Innovations Fail to Scale"
sources: ["futures"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-futures"
originDay: 2
articleStem: "hbr-nm-102-innovations-fail-to-scale"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2026/03/why-great-innovations-fail-to-scale"
sourceTitle: "Why Great Innovations Fail to Scale"
---
# How can companies effectively reward collective activities?

**Open question:** The authors note that *'too few companies know how to reward collective activities and results, which can lead to burnout for the leaders holding partnerships together.'* The text suggests giving [[concept-bridger|bridgers]] visibility and having superiors deliberately surface their achievements, but it does **not** detail structural compensation or performance-review mechanisms for collective success.

**Resolution path:** Case studies or frameworks detailing specific **compensation models, KPI adjustments, or performance-review rubrics** that incentivize and measure bridging behaviors without relying solely on individual heroics.

**Connected tension (enrichment):** This dovetails with the counter-perspective on **bridger rarity and single-point dependency** — if organizations over-rely on a few heroic bridgers, they risk burnout; the durable fix is embedding bridging capability into teams, processes, and culture (and into development paths like [[action-zigzag-careers|zigzag careers]]).