Comment montrez-vous votre appréciation pour votre équipe de recherche?

You can take it a step further by not only recognizing their effort but also rewarding it. Rewards do not always have to be monetary. It could be a day off, a subscription, an in-office massage, early closure on a Friday. etc.

I‘d like to expand on the very last element of „public announcement“. In top research the protagonists usually know each other or at least of each other. Praising the efforts and results of a researcher externally in the community is key to establish a reputation in the field. This in turn is the most important element of a research career. So apart from the useful and valuable ways to recognise a researcher internally, helping to establish their external reputation is vital.

You can take this further by regularly acknowledging, providing feedback and working collaboratively with the team introducing them to harder projects and allowing them to take the lead. Empowerment to make decisions and learn from mistakes is vital. Knowing how to provide that feedback is just as important.

When a person agrees to join a research team, it means a reasonably high level of expertise. The most important achievement for a team member is usually the legacy role he has played, and for expert recognition of his contributions and expertise, even when not published. The acknowledgment of the fraternity, and the demand for his expertise, is a meaningful and powerful indicator of growth and development in the specific realm of expertise, with all the right attributes. Expert team members want to know that the platform allows them to become all they wish to be. I am a firm believer in the idea that autonomy lends purpose and mastery is then self-achieved. We are talking about a team who already are reasonably expert.

Positive environments are given, and no toxicity is allowed. But in today's world, when everyone tries to be supportive, even challenging is considered negative. But this is anathema to scientists, who thrive on challenge and debate, even if sometimes heated. Great researchers are lone wolves, and work is a pleasure and reward. FUn and games are great to connect, provided the expert's work is being done. Otherwise, we gain a reputation as unserious scientists. I have even been told that I have too many fun and trivial activities, and not enough focused briefs, debriefs, and post-mortems. Post mortem is the time when most work teams in "a normal setting go for a party.

Setting the right incentives must be focused on quality, not quantity. In this day and age there is just too much low value output whereas the focus should be on quality research. I sometimes call it the Daniel Day-Lewis strategy who did the same in the realm of acting.