We have roughly about 20 or so internal standards which are essentially "how to do" pieces of information. These are not RAMS just guides basically about best practice. These encompass everything from working in an office, to lone working, to DSE, to h&s on site etc. 

We've always adopted the approach that the line manager should identify which standard will apply to each individual (not all apply to all staff) and instruct them to read and familairse themselves with it, they have never been made mandatory.

We've tried to engage staff through various means to encourage them to read these standards, we've created mini 10min sessions led by line manager related to standard to make the topic more fun, (bingo, who wants to be a millionaire, you get the picture), we've created a monthly online quiz with prizes which people can enter, we've created time sensitive forced log on's which direct people to standards when starting their computer, to date nothing has really worked.

I've just completed an anual review of staff who have read applicable standards and the percentage has come back at a meagre 18%. At what point do we move away from the carrot and start to use the stick? Is this approach ever acceptable? We spend a lot of time and effort to engage staff for little return. Running out of options. Thoughts? 

Thanks in advance

I agree with Peter about you needing to consider different explanations for the current situation.

Your description of the standards seems to be a bit muddled, which may be part of the explanation. Standards are usually intended to say what has to be done, not how. If they really set out best practice it is likely that they are impractical to apply in the real world, unless you have designed everything to allow best practice to be followed. If they are a guide they cannot be mandatory.

Based on my experience elsewhere I think the lack of interest is probably because people do not find them useful. If that is the case, you are probably directing your effort in the wrong place.

Another way might be to ask them for feedback on the standards.  This might prompt some of them to read them as well as possibly finding out their views about them.

FWIW, we have what sound like very simuilar documents, but we call them 'guidelines' and they have a 'GN-' document number.

So our hierarchy of docs is policies - procedures - guidelines.  The procedures say what you must do, and the guidelines say how you should (normally) do it.  Our internal auditors audit against the procedures, but what people generally actually do is in the guidelines.  If you work according to the guideline, you'll satisfy the procedure - so in that respect theyare effectively internal ACOPs.

I must admit I've never specifically surveyed how many people say they have read (start at the beginning, read to the end) the guidelines, but actually, if they are doing the job right it doesn't much matter if they are following the guidleine because they read it in the GN-HS-123 document or whether they are doing it that way because that's how they were shown / told / trained to do it.