Basic Premise There’s a mismatch between what science knows and what business does External, carrot-and-stick motivators don’t work and often do harm Video Links: Animated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJchttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc TED Talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y
We Share Ideas Alternative Three essential elements 1.Autonomy — The desire to direct our own lives 2.Mastery — The urge to make progress and get better at something that matters 3.Purpose — The yearning to do what we do in the service of something larger than ourselves
We Share Ideas Three Drives Per Harry Harlow and Edward Deci: –Human beings have a biological drive that includes hunger, thirst, and sex –Second drive — To respond to rewards and punishments in our environment –Third drive — What some call “intrinsic motivation” –“When institutions — families, schools, businesses, and athletic teams — focus on the short-term and opt for controlling people’s behavior,” they do considerable long-term damage
We Share Ideas Big Idea – Motivation/Hygiene Theory “Hygiene factors”—such as salary, security, and status—were crucial for avoiding job dissatisfaction Had little impact on job satisfaction Satisfaction depended on “growth or motivator factors” — things like interesting work, greater responsibility, and the opportunity to grow Organizations that tried to boost performance by using hygiene factors — by offering bonuses or holding out the prospect of a promotion — were playing a game they couldn’t win The better approach -- focus on job enrichment and make the work itself more challenging and meaningful
We Share Ideas Big Idea – Motivation/Hygiene Theory Baseline Rewards are things like salary, contract payments, benefits, and a few perks that represent the floor for compensation If someone’s baseline rewards aren’t adequate or equitable, her focus will be on the unfairness of her situation or the anxiety of her circumstance, making motivation of any sort extremely difficult
We Share Ideas The Rise and Fall of Motivation 2.0 The first human operating system — call it Motivation 1.0 — was all about survival Its successor, Motivation 2.0, was built around external rewards and punishments. That worked fine for routine twentieth-century tasks. In the twenty-first century, Motivation 2.0 is proving incompatible with how we organize what we do, how we think about what we do, and how we do what we do
We Share Ideas Carrots and Sticks Seven Deadly Flaws 1.They can extinguish intrinsic motivation 2.They can diminish performance 3.They can crush creativity 4.They can crowd out good behavior 5.They can encourage cheating, shortcuts, and unethical behavior 6.They can become addictive 7.They can foster short-term thinking
We Share Ideas Carrots and sticks aren’t all bad Can be effective for rule-based routine tasks 1.little intrinsic motivation to undermine and not much creativity to crush 2.More effective if you offer a rationale for why the task is necessary, acknowledge that it’s boring
We Share Ideas Carrots and sticks aren’t all bad For nonroutine conceptual tasks “Now that” rewards — noncontingent rewards given after a task is complete — can sometimes be okay for more creative, right-brain work Especially if they provide useful information about performance
We Share Ideas Question: When have you seen carrots and sticks work? Or not work? 1.They can extinguish intrinsic motivation 2.They can diminish performance 3.They can crush creativity 4.They can crowd out good behavior 5.They can encourage cheating, shortcuts, and unethical behavior 6.They can become addictive 7.They can foster short-term thinking
We Share Ideas Type I (Intrinsic) and Type X (Extrinsic) Behavior Motivation 2.0 depended on and fostered Type X (Extrinsic) behavior – concerned with the external rewards to which an activity leads Motivation 3.0 depends on and fosters Type I (Intrinsic) behavior – concerned more with the inherent satisfaction of the activity itself
We Share Ideas Type I (Intrinsic) and Type X (Extrinsic) Behavior The good news is that Type I’s are made, not born—and Type I behavior leads to stronger performance, greater health, and higher overall well-being True, in your experience?
We Share Ideas Autonomy Our “default setting” is to be autonomous and self-directed Unfortunately, circumstances conspire to change that default setting and turn us from Type I to Type X To encourage Type I behavior, and the high performance it enables, the first requirement is autonomy Organizations that have found inventive, sometimes radical, ways to boost autonomy are outperforming their competitors
We Share Ideas Questions: How has autonomy worked as a motivator in your company? Or not worked?
We Share Ideas Mastery Motivation 2.0 required compliance Motivation 3.0 demands engagement Mastery begins with “flow” — optimal experiences when challenges are matched to our abilities –Mastery is a mindset -- It requires the capacity to see your abilities not as finite, but as infinitely improvable –Mastery is a pain -- It demands effort, grit, and deliberate practice –Mastery is an asymptote -- It’s impossible to fully realize, which makes it simultaneously frustrating and alluring
We Share Ideas Questions: When/where have you seen instances of mastery or “flow” in your life? In your company?
We Share Ideas Purpose Humans, by their nature, seek purpose In Motivation 3.0, purpose maximization is taking its place alongside profit maximization as an aspiration and a guiding principle. This “purpose motive” is expressing itself in three ways: –In goals that use profit to reach purpose –In words that emphasize more than self-interest –In policies that allow people to pursue purpose on their own terms
We Share Ideas Questions: What’s your company’s purpose? Are you on a personal path toward purpose?
We Share Ideas Jim Collins – Good to Great “Expending energy trying to motivate people is largely a waste of time” The right people will be self-motivated “How do you manage in such a way as not to de-motivate people?”
We Share Ideas Jim Collins – Self-motivation Culture “Lead with questions, not answers” “Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion” “Conduct autopsies, without blame” “Build ‘red flag’ mechanisms”
We Share Ideas 3.0 Ideas – FedEx Days Created by the Australian software company Atlassian One-day bursts of autonomy Allow employees to tackle any problem they want Show the results to the rest of the company at the end of twenty-four hours. Why the name? Because you have to deliver something overnight.
We Share Ideas 3.0 Ideas – ROWE Results-only work environment (ROWE) The brainchild of two American consultants, a ROWE is a workplace in which employees don’t have schedules They don’t have to be in the office at a certain time or any time They just have to get their work done
We Share Ideas 3.0 Ideas – 20 Percent Time An initiative in place at a few companies in which employees can spend 20 percent of their time working on any project they choose