Recommendation rating:
Summary
Daniel Pink's Drive is about human psychology and motivation, and how that shifts from basic needs to compliance and a carrot-and-stick system and further still to the need for a new dynamic (Motivation 3.0) of autonomy + mastery + purpose in our 21st-century workforce. Pink argues that “carrot-and-stick” has its place but for the modern workforce, i.e., the innovation economy, they are ineffective motivators. Rather if you have a highly skilled employee base and want them to excel at non-routine and creative activities, they need measured autonomy to pursue mastery in their own areas of choosing. This would be under a banner of purpose in doing something larger than just for individual selves. The book mixes anecdotal with empirical studies toward a narrative on why we need to change how we pay, monitor, empower, and communicate with employees.
Intro
Review of past studies on monkeys that showed, to researchers' surprise, they will solve puzzles (or do things) for the pleasure or curiosity of it
Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivators. Pay-for-performance doesn't work and may cause harm. We are not always or consistently motivated by Carrot or the Stick.
Motivation 1.0: food, sex, shelter --- survival
Motivation 2.0: almighty dollar and profit maximization / Carrot and Stick motivation
Deci Soma Puzzle Experiment:
3 Groups are invited to solve puzzles - making given shapes out of the same pieces - as many as they can. 2 of the 3 groups are never paid across 3 sessions. 1 of the groups is Not Paid, then Paid, then told they have no more money so Not Paid in the last session. During the ensuing eight-minute free-choice period, the subjects in the never-been-paid. But the subjects in Group A, who previously had been paid, responded differently. They now spent significantly less time playing with the puzzle— not only about two minutes less than during their paid session, but about a full minute less than in the first session when they initially encountered, and obviously enjoyed, the puzzles.
Thus, once an extrinsic motivator is introduced then you must continually keep that up or increase it in order to get the same reaction.
Ch.1: Rise & Fall of Motivation 2.0
Intro to Behavioral Economics and Kahneman: People are not Homo Oeconomus - people make "irrational" choices because we have different intrinsic motivators ( and biases)
There is a difference between algorithmic work (follow set steps, etc.) and heuristic work (need to build framework and solve/devise). With those differences, incentives and performance vary. Oversight, dictation, and Carrot/Stick may work better for algorithmic vs heuristic
Motivation 2.0 doesn't align with modern society as companies flatten mgmt (thus trust in people to work), people are equally (perhaps more) purpose driven as they are profit driven, if basic needs are met. Thus, as society moves to more heuristic work (motivation 1.0 = 1 survival) then a change in motivation and emphasis or environments to appeal to creative work.
The success of open source software demonstrates a new business model for the 21st century. It depends on intrinsic motivation. People can transcend being the extrinsically motivated profit maximizer to being an intrinsically motivated purpose maximizer.
Ch.2: 7 Reasons Carrots and Sticks (often) Don't Work
Lepper and Greene student experiment: observing children at play in school, they noted which kids preferred to draw or color in their free time. They then approached some of those kids and offered them a prize to draw or color. They approached others after they choose to use free time to draw or color and gave them a prize. Lastly, they had a group where they gave no prize and did not interact. A week later, they returned and the teachers set out the colors and markers. The group that was offered a reward upfront spent far less time than they had prior and than did the other two groups in coloring or drawing. The other two groups amount of coloring and drawing was consistent to before the experiment.
The reward itself wasn't necessarily the cause but the contingency of a reward (to me: transactional) - if you do this, you'll get that -
The candle, matches, and box of tacks on a table exercise - in which people must light the candle in a way that the wax does not hit the table. One group was asked to solve it while being timed in order to establish a baseline for performance. Another group was told they'd get 1960s $5 for being in the top 25% and $20 for being fastest --- on average group 2 performed 2.5 mins longer than group 1. Doing things because you want to and enjoy it is far better than an extrinsic motivator.
Glucksberg, S. (1962). The influence of strength of drive on functional fixedness and perceptual recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044683
Glucksberg, S. (1964). Problem Solving: Response Competition and the Influence of Drive. Psychological Reports, 15(3), 939–942. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1964.15.3.939
Another study 23x20=460 art pieces were selected, half of them commissioned and 1/2 just done by the artist without commission. A nonrelated panel of art critics and artists were selected, ignorant of the experiment, and asked to rate the quality and creativity of the art pieces. The quality judgement on the works came out equal, while the creativity of the noncommissioned pieces was rated significantly higher.
"It is those who are least motivated to pursue extrinsic rewards that are most likely to receive them."
Amabile, Teresa M., Elise Phillips, and Mary Ann Collins. "Person and environment in talent development: The case of creativity." (1994).
Similarly, blood donors - a group separated into 3 - 1 was purely volunteer, 1 was paid to donate, 1 would have money donated to charity. 51% of group 1 showed up to donate. 30% of group 2. 53% of group 3.
Monetary rewards can taint an altruistic act - “crowding out” intrinsic desire to do something good.
Goals imposed by others—sales targets, quarterly returns, standardized tests, "SMART" goals, etc—can sometimes have dangerous side effects (IMO: flattening a multivariable and dynamic environment into static and narrow objectives can lead to gaming the system into an extrinsic reward where only the destination matters and thus some people will choose the quickest route to get there.. ) "Goals may cause systemic problems for organizations due to narrowed focus, unethical behavior, increased risk taking, decreased cooperation, and decreased intrinsic motivation. use care when applying goals in your organization."
Rewards are addictive - "chase the high" - once offered people may expect them again and again… Before long, the existing reward may no longer suffice. The bonus quickly begins to feel like the status-quo. "If-Then"
"If-Then" rewards usually do more harm than good - though extrinsic rewards have their value and place. "Now-that" can be more effective. If you design an awesome poster then you get a reward… vs. Now that you have designed an awesome poster (post-action, unexpected reward) I would like to express gratitude/thanks/gift.
Increase Motivation for Routine Tasks By:
Offering a rationale for why the task is necessary. Make something not inherently interesting more meaningful (add purpose)
Acknowledging the task is boring. Show empathy.. (IMO… aahh?)
Allowing people to complete the task in their own way. (add autonomy)
Autonomy, mastery, and purpose - those are the keys.
Ch. 3: I vs X
Intro to Self Determination Theory - the cogn / pscyh sciences approach as a macro theory of human motivation and personality based off one's innate growth tendencies and innate psychological needs, people act based off intrinsic and varied extrinsic sources of motivation
Intrinsic vs eXtrinsic: intrinsic is renewable. Intrinsic promotes greater physical and mental well-being. Intrinsic is born and made, does not disdain money or recognition, and almost always (long run) outperforms eXtrinsic.
Provided compensation is fair and adequate, Intrinsic is far superior to eXtrinsic.
X must continually be used and upp'ed to get the same effect - the expectation is there and must be met to motivate - most successful people, evidence shows, often aren't directly pursuing conventional notions of success, they're working hard and creatively, persisting through challenges, from an internal desire to control their lives, learn, and accomplish something enduring.
Ch. 4: Autonomy
ROWE - Results-Only Work Environment - example given reflecting positive outcomes when heuristic workers (creative, problem solving types) were given the freedom to work when and how they saw fit so long as the end results were met. Compensation was also unlinked to goal setting so that the motivation is about the work and not the dollars.
The "old way" of thinking is reflected in terminology, such as Human Resources or Human Capital - they are expendable and tools of utilitarianism (my hyper take) vs human beings that are purpose driven.
Management practices largely remain focused on compliance, control, and extrinsic motivators… antiquated compared to the "right brain" nonroutine activities of modern workers… or perhaps even disjointed from human nature. The old view being that people won't work (remain inert) unless prodded (Carrot and stick (which itself is reference to motivating an animal, such as a donkey, toward labor)). Perhaps… management practices and views are one of many factors that have inculcated the ideas (programmed us) to think of others in such a way that we see them like work horses - they won't move until kicked and they won't find their way unless guided.
A way to counter these cultural programs is to enable one's sense of autonomy.
Refer back to Ch 3 and Self Determination Theory (which I keep reading at STD rather than SDT), where a key factor is sense of autonomy.
Intrinsic behavior ( and rewards ) emerge when there is sense of autonomy over the 4 T's: Task, Time, Technique, Team
Tasks
Atlassian does "FedEx" days - where the employees are plied with food, beer, and 24 hours ('deliver something overnight', thus the FedEx) to work on anything they want and the opportunity to present it to the group.
3M visionary leader in the 1930's allowed employees to do whatever they wanted for 20% of their time, setting a progressive tone for autonomy - and it reaped sticky-notes among other inventions. Same with Google and Gmail, among others.
Sanctioned side projects can really pay off, hard to do in day-2-day and business operations, but necessary for today's economy and workforce.
Autonomy over Tasks is Motivation 3.0.
Time
The billable hour is a relic of Motivation 2.0. One that stimies quality, creative outputs and throttles autonomy.
Studies show lawyers tend to be more pessimistic. This is due to a few theorized factors: (1) they suck… ok, no, (1) pessimism is helpful in forming counter arguments and mitigations, etc. (2) it’s a zero sum game (you win and they lose), (3) the billable hour --- where focus becomes about billing vs outputs, billing is the output and the service provided becomes secondary.
The "put in your time" vs "get desired results" is a distinction between Motivation 2 vs Motivation 3.0.
Technique
Zappos pays job candidates that are selected and go through training a $2K walk-away check if they want to leave (testing the Motivation 2.0 system). Once rejected and fully onboard, their call center employees have latitude - autonomy of calls. No scripts of flowcharts. No attempts to minimize time on call. Just get the customer what they need…
Ch.5 Mastery
Control leads to compliance; autonomy leads to engagement.
Only engagement can produce mastery, so states the author and the build up of this chapter. Solving complex problems requires an inquiring mind and the willingness to experiment in one's own way. Compliance avoids mistakes but rarely innovates or simplifies. It also generally fails to motivate.
Of 11000 scientists and engineers surveyed, those that listed the urge to master something new filed significantly more patents and other measures of productivity than those that listed money as their primary motivator.
Chapter introduces and covers the various aspects of Flow.
Mastery is a mindset
Those that view intelligence like height are self limiting and show less achievement and resilience. Those that view intelligence like muscle, which can be incrementally increased with work, achieved higher levels of mastery, problem solving, etc
See studies by Dweck.
Type x - extrinsic motivated- view struggle at weakness or signs of limited ability and give up, they prefer performance goals to learning goals (an A in French vs. Speaking French)..
Mastery is a pain
Goes over the study of entering cadets at West point to show that more than intelligence or physical ability, great was the number one indicator of who made it and didn't..
"Effort is one of the things that gives meaning to life. If it means you care about something, that something is important to you and you are willing to work for it. It would be an impoverished existence if you are not willing to value things and commit yourself to working toward them." Carol Dweck
Mastery is an asymptote
Mastery is impossible to fully realize. The joys is in the pursuit more than the realization.
• Work can often have the structure of other autotelic experiences: clear goals, immediate feedback, challenges well matched to our abilities. When it does, we don't just enjoy it more we do it better.
• in Harvard study, among others, found that the single greatest motivator to an individual is making progress in one's work
• the days that people make progress are the days they feel most motivated and engaged. By creating conditions for people to make progress, shining a light on that progress, recognizing and celebrating it, organizations can help their own cause and those of the employees
• "There is no reason to believe any longer that only irrelevant play can be enjoyed, while the serious business of Life must be born as a burdensome cross. Once we realize that the boundaries between work and play are artificial, we can take matters in hand and begin the difficult task of making life more livable" - Csikszentmihalyi (work scholar)
- the author speculates that as adults we wrongly cling to the idea of work as work with no play, whereas children move from one flow moment to another, animated by sense of joy, equipped with the mindset of possibility, and working with dedication.. perhaps we as individuals and our work with both be better off getting rid of our "mature" view of work as work, separate from play and joy
Ch 6 purpose
Motivation 2.0 centers on profit maximization. Motivation 3.0 doesn't reject the power of profit but places equal emphasis on purpose maximization - that can be seen in goals, words, and policies
Goals: e.g., TOMS shoes goal is to turn consumers into benefactors by giving away a pair of shoes for every pair purchased.
These "not only for profit" are a more genuine enterprise than companies with "social responsibility" (see the book "Woke Inc").
The goal is pursuit of purpose where profit is a means, not an end.
Words
"We" companies are very different places than "They" companies. Words matter. Employee: "we have policies on..." Vs "they made policies on.."
Corporate ethics policies transforms “do it because it’s the right thing to do” into “do this to check off the box.” This can reduce intrinsic motivation into extrinsic motivation (CYA policies vs. We trust our people).
Spend less time on "how" to get it done and more time on "why". Call center Representatives working on a university fundraising campaign or split into three groups. One group read stories each day from previous call center employees about the benefits of their job, such as being more articulate, dealing with people, etc.. the second group read stories from previous scholarship recipients and the benefits that it brought them. The third group just did business as normal. The result... The second group more than double the contributions to the fundraising campaign, while neither of the other groups showed a rise in donations compared to the prior average.
Part 2 is "Toolkit"
This section provides various activities to do, of which I picked a few:
Purpose and Flow - Ask Yourself A Big Question.. Or series of small ones…
A great person is one sentence. Don’t let your attention be splintered among different priorities such that your sentence becomes a muddled paragraph.
One way to orient your life toward greater purpose is to think about your sentence. …Then Keep Asking Small Questions… e.g., (a) At the end of each day, ask yourself whether you were better today than you were yesterday. (b) Look for small measures of improvement.
Write the question and answer to the following: (1) What gets you up in the morning?, and (2) What keeps you up at night?
If you don’t like one or both of your answers, then ask: (3) What are you going to do about it?
“Whose Purpose Is It Anyway?” -- Ask everyone to write down their answer to the question: “What is our company’s purpose?” If people don’t know why they’re doing what they’re doing, how can you expect them to be motivated to do it?
The Pronoun Test - Do employees refer to their company as “they” or “we”? “We” suggest that people feel part of something significant and meaningful.
Paying People the Type I Way:
Most important is fairness: internal and external.
Internal fairness = Paying people commensurate with their colleagues.
External fairness = Paying people in line with others doing similar work in similar organizations.
Pay people a bit more than market. (Attract better talent, reduce turnover, and boost productivity and morale. - Easy to say)
If you use performance metrics, make them wide-ranging, relevant and hard to game.
You can get the Book Here
Comments