What Motivates Us To Do Great Work? by Jocelyn K. Glei

What Motivates Us To Do Great Work?

by Jocelyn K. Glei

What motivates us to do great work? It’s an age-old question. But the age-old answers – rewards, recognition, money, stability – no longer seem to suffice. As we’ve shifted to a knowledge-based economy, it turns out that what drives us has shifted, too.

Recent research reveals that when creative thinking is part and parcel of your job description, external motivation just doesn’t work. The year-end bonus, the promotion, the basic dangled carrot approach – these things don’t inspire better performance.

What really gets creatives fired up is, well, ourselves. That is, intrinsic motivation. If we can imagine an achievement, see ourselves progressing toward that goal, and understand that we are gaining new skills and knowledge, we will be driven to do great work.

In a recent post, science writer Jonah Lehrer cites an interesting study about “self-talk” – the running commentary we always have going on in our heads. Fifty-three undergraduate students were divided into two groups and then challenged to solve anagrams:

“The first group was told to prepare for an anagram-solving task by thinking, for one minute, about whether they would work on anagrams. This is the ‘Will I?’ condition, which the scientists refer to as the ‘interrogative form of self-talk’. The second group, in contrast, was told to spend one minute thinking that they would work on anagrams. This is the ‘I Will’ condition, or the ‘declarative form of self-talk’. Both groups were then given ten minutes to solve as many anagrams as possible.”

Contrary to what you might expect, the “Will I?” group solved significantly more puzzles. The uncertainty created by the question, allowed the students to decide to challenge themselves, and then excel. Lehrer sums it up:

“Subsequent experiments by the scientists suggested that the power of the ‘Will I?’ condition resides in its ability to elicit intrinsic motivation. (We are intrinsically motivated when we are doing an activity for ourselves, because we enjoy it. In contrast, extrinsic motivation occurs when we're doing something for a paycheck or any ‘extrinsic’ reward.) By interrogating ourselves, we set up a well-defined challenge that we can master. And it is this desire for personal fulfillment - being able to tell ourselves that we solved the anagrams - that actually motivates us to keep on trying.”

In his latest book, Drive, author Daniel Pink debunks the power of external motivators, and expands on the intrinsic motivators that inspire us to do great work. Using research from a study out of MIT, Pink argues that traditional rewards – external motivators like a year-end bonus – only elicit better performance from people doing rote tasks. But once the barest amount of brainpower is required, higher financial rewards fail to produce better work. In fact, they actually inspire worse performance.

For creative thinkers, Pink identifies three key motivators: autonomy (self-directed work), mastery (getting better at stuff), and purpose (serving a greater vision). All three are intrinsic motivators. Even a purpose, which can seem like an external motivator, will be internalized if you truly believe in it.

A recent Harvard study further reinforces the power of intrinsic motivation. After tracking 1200 knowledge workers, Teresa M. Amabile and Steven J. Kramer found that the # 1 motivator for the employees was progress – the feeling that they were moving forward and achieving a greater goal. They write:

“On days when workers have the sense they’re making headway in their jobs, or when they receive support that helps them overcome obstacles, their emotions are most positive and their drive to succeed is at its peak. On days when they feel they are spinning their wheels or encountering roadblocks to meaningful accomplishment, their moods and motivation are lowest.”

As creative thinkers, we want to make progress, and we want to move big ideas forward. So, it's no surprise that the best motivator is being empowered to take action.

When it comes to recommendations for creative leaders, Amabile and Kramer don’t mince words: “Scrupulously avoid impeding progress by changing goals autocratically, being indecisive, or holding up resources.” In short, give your team members what they need to thrive, and then get out of the way.

Public Opinion Snapshot: The Public's Lack of Enthusiasm for Cutting Government, by Ruy Teixeira

Public Opinion Snapshot: The Public’s Lack of Enthusiasm for Cutting Government

By Ruy Teixeira | October 18, 2010

• PRINT
 
• EMAIL
 
• TEXT-SIZE: A A A 
• SHARE:    

If you listened to conservatives and some media accounts you’d think there was an enormous public groundswell to reduce the size of government as rapidly as possible. But that does not appear to be the case. Widespread dissatisfaction with government performance has not translated into strong support for cutting government. Consider these results from a just-released survey on Americans’ attitudes toward government conducted by The Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard University.

The public was asked if they supported more, less, about the same, or no federal government involvement in dealing with a variety of issues. On five domestic policy issues majorities ranging from 67 to 84 percent wanted to see either the same or more federal government involvement in the issue. (In fact, on four of these issues outright majorities actually wanted to see more federal involvement.) Those wanting to see less or no involvement ranged from only 32 down to 16 percent.

Doesn’t sound like cutting government mania has taken hold in these areas. Then consider this result from a general question about whether you’d rather have the federal government provide more services even if it cost more in taxes or have the federal government cost less in taxes but provide fewer services.

A slight plurality (49 percent) preferred the first government-expanding option over the second government-cutting option (47 percent). Even more interestingly, these sentiments are notably less hostile to government’s role than has been the case at a number of points in the past. In 1994 only 28 percent selected the government-expanding option, while 57 percent preferred the government-cutting option.

Finally, what does the public say they want their representative in Congress to do—fight for more spending to create jobs in their district or fight to cut government spending even if that means fewer jobs in the district?

It turns out that, by 57-39, they want their representative to fight for more spending to create jobs. Again, there is no evidence here of an overriding commitment to cut government. And again we see a less hostile attitude toward government’s role than was seen back in 1994 when, by 53-42, the public came down on the cutting spending side of the choice.

So does the public want to see government performance improved? Yes, and in a big way. But don’t believe the conservative hype about a public thirsty to cut government. It’s just not happening.

Ruy Teixeira is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress. To learn more about his public opinion analysis go to the Media and Progressive Values page and the Progressive Studies program page of our website.

You Already Know How To Be Great, by Michael McKinney reviewing a book by Alan Fine

You Already Know How to Be Great

One of the hardest things we will attempt to do is to act on what we already know to do. It’s that difficulty that lies behind much of our search for the next big thing; some way to get around or make easier that which we know we should be doing. It is never easy but by applying some new thinking we can get out of our own way. 

Alan Fine states in You Already Know How to Be Great, that performance improvement is most often an issue of reducing theinterference that’s getting in the way of using the knowledge we already have. Fine says that we have to get right the three elements that facilitate the use of the knowledge we already have. They are: 

Faith: Our beliefs about ourselves and our beliefs about others. High performance is more likely when we believe that we can learn and do better. The absence of Faith could be described as insecurity. 

Fire: Our energy, passion, motivation, and commitment. High performance is more likely when we are excited about learning and doing. The absence of Firecould be described as indifference. 

Focus: What we pay attention to and how we pay attention to it. High performance is more likely when we pay attention in a way that will quiet our minds. The absence of Focus could be described as inconsistency. 

High performance happens when we “get rid of the interference that blocks these natural, inherent human gifts.” Focus is the most powerful tool for removing distractions and thus the “most effective way to release Faith and Fire.” If we “create a singular focus on one or more critical variables of the task, we’re far more likely to create the flow state that creates high performance.” 

More than instructing, Fine believes we would be better off looking to what is blocking Faith, Fire, and Focus in our organizations, performers, families and teams. Unleashing these qualities facilitates the use of knowledge.

As managers, leaders, coaches, or parents, we’re incredulous to think (or more likely, it never even occurs to us to think) that without our excessive instructing, regulating, controlling, directing, and intervening, people might actually be able to perform with greater confidence, more enthusiasm, and more effective focus.

Fine introduces the GROW process as a way of creating focus. The process asks: “What is my Goal? What’s the Reality? What are my Options? What’s the best Way Forward? 

GROW increases Decision Velocity [the speed and accuracy with which we make decisions]. It helps reduce interference, clarify thinking, identify options, and chunk down the challenge into doable tasks. It unblocks Faith, Fire, and Focus and frees people to use the Knowledge they already have. 

As leaders, we tend to approach most situations by providing more information. We actually nourish the expectation that we are to be telling people what to do, when we really need to working to help them get what’s inside of them out. Fine calls this inside-out coaching. It’s less about providing more Knowledge and more about releasing the Faith, Fire and Focus that already there in the performer. It’s more Focus coaching than it is Knowledge coaching. “It’s easy for coaches to get blindsided by what they think people have to pay attention to—to get so focused on the task that they miss the window through which a person can actually pay attention.” 

“When leaders simply tell people what to do (which is often the case), the result is often a lack of engagement and accountability on the part of the employee and little or no performance improvement. One of the primary observable signs of an outside-in approach is people constantly asking managers, leaders, teachers, or parents what to do.” As a coach, the biggest challenge isn’t the performer; it’s your own interference. 

You Already Know How to Be Great is about coaching ourselves and others to remove the interference that is blocking performance. It is full of applications of inside-out coaching and the GROW process he advocates. As such, it is indispensable book for coaches or leaders of all types. 

8 Reasons You’re Stuck, by Dan Rockwell

#1. No vision – day to day urgencies create a fog that obscures future objectives and opportunities.

#2. Waiting for perfection – perfection is the enemy of progress.

#3. Lack of prioritization and delegation – the belief that you have to touch or do everything is a ball and chain.

#4. Complacency – your own complacency, more importantly the complacency of those close to you.

#5. Fear of opinions – over-concern about what others think is a snare that creates timid leaders.

#6. No Urgency – Kottner believes the #1 reason projects fail is lack of urgency.

#7. How-focus – focusing on “how things get done” more than on “what gets done” paralyzes progress.

#8. Success – Success makes some people feel they know enough. Problem is you don’t know what you don’t know.

Most Frequent Leadership Advice of Jim Kouzes, by Dan Rockwell

I recently asked bestselling author and leadership expert, Jim Kouzes some questions. Here’s part of that exchange.

*****

Leadership Freak: “What piece of leadership advice do you give out most frequently?”

Jim Kouzes: “The most important advice that I can give a leader is credibility is the foundation of leadership. I bet I’ve said this at least once a day for the last 30 years.

This is the inescapable conclusion we’ve come to after thirty years of asking people around the world what they look for and admire in a leader, someone whose direction they would willingly follow. The key word here is “willingly.”

It’s one thing to follow someone because you think you have to “or else,” and it’s another when you follow a leader because you want to. It turns out that the believability of the leader determines whether people will willingly give more of their time, talent, energy, experience, intelligence, creativity, and support.

Only credible leaders earn commitment, and only commitment builds and regenerates great organizations and communities.”

(More tomorrow)

*****

I’m currently finishing, “The Truth about Leadership,” by Kouzes and Posner. Chapter two focuses on credibility. Their First Law of Leadership is, “If you don’t believe the messenger, you won’t believe the message.”

Their research indicates the top four characteristics of admired leader’s are honesty, forward-looking, inspiring, and competency. (in order of importance)

*****

Yesterday, I heard a leader explaining that he convinced his organization to make major investments in an unseen vision. This leader has delivered in the past. Now his organization is following him into the future. That’s credibility.

All leaders inevitably ask others to believe in a not-yet, a vision.

The benefit of credibility is if you do what you say, others will be willing to do what you say.

Persuasion Tactics of Effective Salespeople, by Steve W. Martin

Without language, you wouldn't be able to share your ideas, display your personality, or express yourself to the world. You couldn't communicate your needs and desires to others, and the never-ending dialogue within your mind would grind to a halt. The words we speak truly define who we are. However, since we are continually talking all the time, we often take it for granted.

Many well-established fields of language study exist to help us gain a deeper understanding of how we talk to each other. Sociolinguistics is the study of language use in society and social networks; psycholinguistics is the study of how the mind acquires, uses, and represents language; and neurolinguistics is the study of how brain structures process language. "Sales linguistics" draws from these fields to help us understand how salespeople and their prospective customers use and interpret language during the decision-making process.

Successful customer communications are the foundation of all sales, and the most persuasive and effective salespeople — the ones I call "Heavy Hitters" — naturally speak in the language of their customers. The question is, "What do they say?"

The three fundamental principles, drawn from sales linguistics, can help us be more persuasive salespeople: every customer speaks in his or her own unique language, successful salespeople build rapport through harmonious communication, and, finally, that people are persuaded based on personal connections. Let's look at each of these imperatives in turn:

1. Understand that Customers Speak Unique Languages
Most companies arm their salespeople with a "one size fits all" company sales pitch. Unfortunately, each person on this planet speaks his or her own unique language. All the mundane and traumatic experiences of your life have determined the language you use — where you grew up, the language used by your loved ones, where you went to school, your friends, your career, the amount of money at your disposal, and even your spirituality. Just as no one else has had your exact life experiences, no one else speaks your precise language. Therefore, the language two people use to describe the same situation — or the way two people interpret the same language — may be very different.

For example, reading the word "snake" might cause you to visualize a rattlesnake, python, or a cobra. While these are all specific interpretations of the word, they all may naturally invoke fear and negative emotions. Conversely, if you had raised a pet snake as a child, you probably have a positive mental association. Since the personal meanings of words can vary greatly, you may have thought of an unscrupulous businessperson when you first read the word "snake."

2. Build Rapport Through Harmonious Communication
Unfortunately, when most salespeople meet with prospective customers, they talk in only their own language and only about themselves. The subject of the conversation is me, me, me: my company, my product's benefits, and my product's features and functions. When Heavy Hitter salespeople meet with customers, they talk about them, them, them: their problems, their values, and their plans and desires. They speak their customers' language in order to build rapport.

Rapport is a special relationship between two individuals based upon harmonious communication. However, human communication occurs in several different forms and on several different levels. An immense amount of information is conveyed verbally, nonverbally, consciously, and subconsciously. A Heavy Hitter naturally adapts their mental wiring and language to mirror that of their customer.

3. Persuade People Through Personal Connections
Salespeople are paid to persuade. But what makes them persuasive? Is it their command of the facts and their ability to recite a litany of reasons why customers should buy? In reality, the most product-knowledgeable salesperson is not necessarily the most persuasive one because it takes more than logic and reason to change buyers' opinions. A personal connection must be forged.

Persuasion is the process of projecting your entire set of beliefs and convictions onto another human being. It's not about getting others to acknowledge your arguments or agree with your business case; it's about making them internalize your message because they believe that it is in their best interests. Ultimately, persuasion is the ability to tap into someone's emotions and reach the deeper subconscious decision maker within that person.

Heavy Hitter salespeople are accomplished communicators who know what to say and, equally important, how to say it. Through their mastery of language, they are able to convey and decipher deep underlying messages that less-successful salespeople miss. While using the same language as most salespeople, they develop an uncanny ability to influence nonbelievers to trust them and convince complete strangers to follow their advice. Sales linguistics can help us understand how they turn skeptics into believers and persuade prospective customers to buy.

Steve W. Martin teaches sales strategy at the USC Marshall School of Business. His latest book on sales neurolinguistics, Heavy Hitter Sales Psychology, is based on his successful 20-year sales career.

The Four Capacities Every Great Leader Needs (And Very Few Have), by Tony Schwartz

The Four Capacities Every Great Leader Needs (And Very Few Have): "

When I was a very young journalist, full of bravado and barely concealed insecurity, Ed Kosner, editor of Newsweek, hired me to do a job I wasn't sure I was capable of doing. Thrown into deep water, I had no choice but to swim. But I also knew he wouldn't let me drown. His confidence buoyed me.

Some years later, I was hired away by Arthur Gelb, the managing editor of the New York Times. This time, I was seduced by Gelb's contagious exuberance about being part of a noble fraternity committed to putting out the world's greatest newspaper.

Over the last dozen years, I've worked with scores of CEOs and senior executives to help them build more engaged, high performance cultures by energizing their employees. Along the way, I've landed on four key capacities that show up, to one degree or another, in the most inspiring leaders I've met.

1. Great leaders recognize strengths in us that we don't always yet fully see in ourselves.

This is precisely what Kosner did with me. He provided belief where I didn't yet have it, and I trusted his judgment more than my own. It's the Pygmalion effect: expectations become self-fulfilling.

Both positive and negative emotions feed on themselves. In the absence of Kosner's confidence, I simply wouldn't have assumed I was ready to write at that level.

Because he seemed so sure I could — he saw better than I did how my ambition and relentlessness would eventually help me prevail — I wasted little energy in corrosive worry and doubt.

Instead, I simply invested myself in getting better, day by day, step by step. Because we can achieve excellence in almost anything we practice with sufficient focus and intention, I did get better, which fed my own confidence and satisfaction, and my willingness to keep pushing myself.

2. Rather than simply trying to get more out of us, great leaders seek to understand and meet our needs, above all a compelling mission beyond our immediate self-interest, or theirs.

Great leaders understand that how they make people feel, day in and day out, has a profound influence on how they perform.

We each have a range of core needs — physical, emotional, mental and spiritual. Great leaders focus on helping their employees meet each of these needs, recognizing that it helps them to perform better and more sustainably.

Arthur Gelb helped my meet not just my emotional need to be valued, but also my spiritual need to be engaged in a mission bigger than my own success. Far too few leaders take the time to figure out what they truly stand for, beyond the bottom line, and why we should feel excited to work for them.

3. Great leaders take the time to clearly define what success looks like, and then empower and trust us to figure out the best way to achieve it.

One of our core needs is for self-expression. One of the most demoralizing and infantilizing experiences at work is to feel micromanaged.

The job of leaders is not to do the work of those they lead, but to serve as Chief Energy Officer — to free and fuel us to bring the best of ourselves to work every day.

Part of that responsibility is defining, in the clearest possible way, what's expected of us — our concrete deliverables. This is a time-consuming and challenging process, and most leaders I've met do very little of it. When they do it effectively, the next step for leaders is to get out of the way.

That requires trusting that employees will figure out for themselves the best way to get their work done, and that even though they'll take wrong turns and make mistakes, they learn and grow stronger along the way.

4. The best of all leaders — a tiny fraction — have the capacity to embrace their own opposites, most notably vulnerability alongside strength, and confidence balanced by humility.

This capacity is uniquely powerful because all of us struggle, whether we're aware of it or not, with our self worth. We're each vulnerable to believing, at any given moment, that we're not good enough.

Great leaders don't feel the need to be right, or to be perfect, because they've learned to value themselves in spite of shortcomings they freely acknowledge. In turn, they bring this generous spirit to those they lead.

The more leaders make us feel valued, in spite of our imperfections, the less energy we will spend asserting, defending and restoring our value, and the more energy we have available to create value.

All four capacities are grounded in one overarching insight. Great leaders recognize that the best way to get the highest value is to give the highest value.

"

How to Nail Your Elevator Speech, by Sarah Kessler

Nailing down a short pitch for why someone should invest in your business will come in handy at some point, even if you never actually end up in an elevator with the venture capitalist of your dreams.

For about 30 startups at the Web 2.0 expo in New York last week, that point was Thursday’s Startup Showcase. Attendees, which included Tim O’Reily of O’Reily Media Inc. and Fred Wilson of Union Square ventures, had 50 minutes to check in with each startup and decide on a favorite. O’Reily, Wilson and a popular vote each decided on one startup that conveyed its idea best and in a short time. When Food52, Gympse and hour.ly were selected, they had a chance to give their pitches on stage.

It was, in short, an elevator-pitch bonanza. If contestants didn’t have advice about how to improve an elevator pitch before they started, they sure did by the time their 50 minutes were up. Here is what seven of them had to say.

---

Describe the Problem Your Company Solves

---

• “Keep it short, and make sure your lead-in deals with the problem you’re trying to solve.” — Jeff Evans, Co-Founder of MindSnacks
  Since Evans’ company makes mobile language learning games, he started his pitch by explaining that current language learning programs can be dull, expensive, and time consuming.
• “People have to have an idea of what the problem is and what the current solution is and why yours is better.” — Carl Leubsdorf, CTO of hour.ly
  Leubsdorf’s approach apparently paid off, as hour.ly was voted “people’s choice” at the showcase. Since hour.ly helps connect hiring companies with job seekers, he uses his elevator pitch to explain how the service is superior to something like Craigslist.

---

Get to Your Point

---

• “Know what you have to say and say it fast.” — Ben Hughes, Director of Technology at NabeWise
  In NabeWise’s case, this includes an explanation of why there is a demand for information about neighborhoods and how the company would monetize this site by charging real estate agents to be “neighborhood experts” and selling advertising.
• “Really brief.” — Patrick Swieskowski, Co-Founder of Ninite
  We guess there’s something to be said for practicing what you preach.

---

Interact as Much as Possible

---

• “It doesn’t work quite as well in an elevator, but the way I describe the problem is to show a picture of my first apartment in New York. It helps people understand why storage in New York is a necessity, not a luxury.”– Daniel Hughes, Founder of StorageByMail.
  StorageByMail offers cheaper storage than is typically found in a big city by allowing customers to mail their storage to a warehouse outside of the city. Showing a crowded New York apartment helps investors visualize why there is a need for the service.

---

There’s No Replacement for Finesse

---

• “Practice, practice, practice on new people every day. You can’t develop an effective pitch by yourself…Everyone in my family has heard my pitch 100 times, and when their eyes glaze over I know that I’m doing something wrong.” — David Bloom, CEO of Naama Networks
  Bloom’s current pitch for his online food ordering site mentions that the first e-commerce transaction was apizza, but that since then restaurants haven’t done a great job selling online. It’s an interesting tidbit that prevents eyes from “glazing over,” as he put it.
• “Go for it. ‘Pretty good’ won’t hack. Pretend you’ll be rated on a scale of one to 10 after your pitch. Only a 10 matters. One through four is a one; you’re done. Five through nine is a five; they might remember you and say ‘interesting,’ but you’re done. Only a 10 is success, and hopefully opens the door to the 10 or 60 minute pitch. It’s not about batting average, it’s about home-runs.” — Bryan Trussel, co-founder and CEO ofGlympse.
  Glypse is another company that clearly followed its own advice, winning Fred Wilson’s pick at the showcase. Trussel says part of his successful pitch involves interacting as much as possible with the pitch recipient. For instance, he’ll often ask for the person’s phone number and send a Glympse to his or her phone as part of the pitch. “In 10-15 seconds, I’ve demoed the product, illustrated our key values…and had the person interact with our product on their personal phone,” he says. “And, they now have a permanent, visual reminder in their inbox or text queue for reference.”

R-E-S-P-E-C-T, Commentary by Michael Josephson

R-E-S-P-E-C-T 690.5:

R-E-S-P-E-C-T – Aretha Franklin reminded us how it's spelled, but a lot of us need coaching on how to show it. In both personal and political relationships, the failure to treat each other with respect is generating incivility, contempt, and violence.

There's an important distinction between respecting a person in the sense that we admire and hold that person in especially high esteem and treating others with respect. While respecting others is desirable, respectfulness is morally mandatory. Thus, people of character treat everyone with respect, even those who are not personally respect worthy.

The way we behave toward others is an expression of our values and character. Thus, we should treat others with respect, not because they have a right but because we have a moral duty to do unto others the way we want them to do unto us. Again, it’s not because they deserve it, but because doing less would diminish our own character.

That's the message in an old story about a politician who caught himself being drawn into mud slinging and name calling. Once he realized he was lowering himself to his opponent's level, he stopped and said, 'Sir, I will treat you as a gentleman, not because you are one, but because I am one.'

It can take a lot of self control to be respectful to people who are nasty, dishonorable, or disrespectful to us. Still, our inner sense of integrity should help us resist temptations to 'fight fire with fire.' As Lily Tomlin said, 'The problem with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat.'

This is Michael Josephson reminding you that character counts.