Author: Daniel H. Pink

ISBN: 978-1594484803

An interesting book about what really drives us. The book is especially useful if you want to set up an effective remuneration and bonus policy for your employees.

EXCERPTS

The joy of the task was its own reward.

“When money is used as an external reward for some activity, the subjects lose intrinsic interest for the activity,”

Rewards can deliver a short-term boost— just as a jolt of caffeine can keep you cranking for a few more hours. But the effect wears off— and, worse, can reduce a person’s longer-term motivation to continue the project.

How creative a person feels when working on the project, is the strongest and most pervasive driver.

“the fun … of mastering the challenge of a given problem”

“desire to give a gift to the programmer community.”

Routine work can be outsourced or automated; artistic, empathic, nonroutine work generally cannot.

External rewards and punishments— both carrots and sticks— can work nicely for algorithmic [routine, boring] tasks. [You cannot force crativity. Carrot/ stick don't work for fostering creativity!]

“Intrinsic motivation is conducive to creativity; controlling extrinsic motivation is detrimental to creativity.”

Routine, not-so-interesting jobs require direction; non-routine, more interesting work depends on self-direction.

[Only!] Once we’re past that threshold, carrots and sticks can achieve precisely the opposite of their intended aims.

Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do, and that Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do.”

Try to encourage a kid to learn math by paying her for each workbook page she completes— and she’ll almost certainly become more diligent in the short term and lose interest in math in the long term.

An incentive designed to clarify thinking and sharpen creativity ended up clouding thinking and dulling creativity. Why? Rewards, by their very nature, narrow our focus. That’s helpful when there’s a clear path to a solution.

The artists reported feeling significantly more constrained when doing commissioned works than when doing noncommissioned works.

Not always, but a lot of the time, when you are doing a piece for someone else it becomes more “work” than joy. When I work for myself there is the pure joy of creating and I can work through the night and not even know it. On a commissioned piece you have to check yourself— be careful to do what the client wants.

“The less evidence of extrinsic motivation during art school, the more success in professional art both several years after graduation and nearly twenty years later.”

“It is those who are least motivated to pursue extrinsic rewards who eventually receive them.”

This result is not true across all tasks, of course. Amabile and others have found that extrinsic rewards can be effective for algorithmic tasks— those that depend on following an existing formula to its logical conclusion.

It’s not that all rewards at all times are bad. For instance, when the Italian government gave blood donors paid time off work, donations increased. The law removed an obstacle to altruism.

The ingredients of genuine motivation— autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

Like all extrinsic motivators, goals narrow our focus. That’s one reason they can be effective; they concentrate the mind. But as we’ve seen, a narrowed focus exacts a cost. For complex or conceptual tasks, offering a reward can blinker the wide-ranging thinking necessary to come up with an innovative solution.

Goals may cause systematic 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.

By offering a reward, a principal signals to the agent that the task is undesirable.

But that initial signal, and the reward that goes with it, forces the principal onto a path that’s difficult to leave. Offer too small a reward and the agent won’t comply. But offer a reward that’s enticing enough to get the agent to act the first time, and the principal “is doomed to give it again in the second.” There’s no going back. Pay your son to take out the trash— and you’ve pretty much guaranteed the kid will never do it again for free. What’s more, once the initial money buzz tapers off, you’ll likely have to increase the payment to continue compliance.

Carrots and sticks aren’t all bad. If they were, Motivation 2.0 would never have flourished so long or accomplished so much.

Glucksberg’s experiment provides the first question you should ask when contemplating external motivators: Is the task at hand routine? That is, does accomplishing it require following a prescribed set of rules to a specified end? For routine tasks, which aren’t very interesting and don’t demand much creative thinking, rewards can provide a small motivational booster shot without the harmful side effects.

What’s more, for some people, much of what they do all day consists of these routine, not terribly captivating, tasks. In these situations, it’s best to try to unleash the positive side of the Sawyer Effect by attempting to turn work into play— to increase the task’s variety, to make it more like a game, or to use it to help master other skills. Alas, that’s not always possible. And this means that sometimes, even “if-then” rewards are an option.

Offer a rationale for why the task is necessary. A job that’s not inherently interesting can become more meaningful, and therefore more engaging, if it’s part of a larger purpose.

Acknowledge that the task is boring. This is an act of empathy.

Allow people to complete the task their own way.

The best way to avoid the seven deadly flaws of extrinsic motivators is to avoid them altogether or to downplay them significantly and instead emphasize the elements of deeper motivation— autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

But in the workplace, a rigid adherence to this approach bumps up against a fact of life: Even people who do groovy, creative, right-brain work still want to be paid.

Any extrinsic reward should be unexpected and offered only after the task is complete.

So when the poster turns out great, you could buy the design team a case of beer or even hand them a cash bonus without snuffing their creativity. The team didn’t expect any extras and getting them didn’t hinge on a particular outcome. You’re simply offering your appreciation for their stellar work. But keep in mind one ginormous caveat: Repeated “now that” bonuses can quickly become expected “if- then” entitlements— which can ultimately crater effective performance.

Limit rewards for nonroutine, creative work!

But you’ll do even better if you follow two more guidelines.

First, consider nontangible rewards. Praise and positive feedback are much less corrosive than cash and trophies.

Second, provide useful information.

People are thirsting to learn about how they’re doing, but only if the information isn’t a tacit effort to manipulate their behavior. So don’t tell the design team: “That poster was perfect. You did it exactly the way I asked.” Instead, give people meaningful information about their work. The more feedback focuses on specifics (“great use of color”)— and the more the praise is about effort and strategy rather than about achieving a particular outcome— the more effective it can be.

If her pay isn’t equitable compared to others doing similar work— that person’s motivation will crater, regardless of whether she leans toward X or toward I.

Type I behavior emerges when people have autonomy over the four T’s: their task, their time, their technique, and their team.

As wonderful as flow is, the path to mastery— becoming ever better at something you care about— is not lined with daisies and spanned by a rainbow.

“Whereas the importance of working harder is easily apprehended, the importance of working longer without switching objectives may be less perceptible … in every field, grit may be as essential as talent to high accomplishment.”

“Being a professional,” Julius Erving once said, “is doing the things you love to do, on the days you don’t feel like doing them.”

The joy is in the pursuit more than the realization.

Internal fairness means paying people commensurate with their colleagues. External fairness means paying people in line with others doing similar work in similar organizations.

The pay-more-than-average approach can offer an elegant way to bypass “if-then” rewards, eliminate concerns about unfairness, and help take the issue of money off the table.

The gain for reaching the metrics shouldn’t be too large. When the payoff for reaching targets is modest, rather than massive, it’s less likely to narrow people’s focus or encourage them to take the low road.

Here’s why an allowance is good for kids: Having a little of their own money, and deciding how to save or spend it, offers a measure of autonomy and teaches them to be responsible with cash.

Here’s why household chores are good for kids: Chores show kids that families are built on mutual obligations and that family members need to help each other.

Here’s why combining allowances with chores is not good for kids. By linking money to the completion of chores, parents turn an allowance into an “if-then” reward. This sends kids a clear (and clearly wrongheaded) message: In the absence of a payment, no self-respecting child would willingly set the table, empty the garbage, or make her own bed.

Done right, praise is an important way to give kids feedback and encouragement. But done wrong, praise can become yet another “if-then” reward that can squash creativity and stifle intrinsic motivation.

Praise effort and strategy, not intelligence.

Make praise specific.

Praise in private.

Offer praise only when there’s a good reason for it.

If you overpraise, kids regard it as dishonest and unearned. Plus, overpraising becomes another “if-then” reward that makes earning praise, rather than moving toward mastery, the objective.

“Expending energy trying to motivate people is largely a waste of time.”

“If you have the right people on the bus, they will be self-motivated. The real question then becomes: How do you manage in such a way as not to de-motivate people?”

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Predispositions for satisfied employees:

  • good environment (relationships),
  • flexibility (of time and place) is possible

Best remuneration policy to keep you employees satisfied:

  • above average base salary (just a little bit above average)
  • for creative tasks: mission/ purpose of work + autonomy (task, time, technique and team) + mastery (work challenges current abilities),
  • for routine tasks: reward work (e.g. bonus for quantity)
open