Dan Pink on Motivation

Comment

Comment by Carlos Quintero on September 9, 2009 at 5:09pm

Paul....some random thoughts......

Dan Pink is someone I admire. I read A WHOLE NEW MIND two years ago and found his message highly engaging and something I personally identified with directly.

In sales, financial performance remains a driver as many go into sales since the field provides a high degree of autonomy as well as financial reward.

Yet people want to be part of a team that has a purpose. The best sales managers are able to capture that spirit and when it works, performance far outshines other teams. And the managers that make MASTERY a way of life reap the long-term rewards.

Compensation remains a big factor in sales organizations. Sales compensation strategy needs to be aligned to where a company is now, or where it is going. That strategy would be different during startups vs when a company is in a more mature industry.

The type of person drawn to those companies will also vary. Certainly, I observe my two boys being driven by multiple factors today, and being much more entrepreneurial in nature.

The internet has provided freedom for people to experiment and large institutions seldom provide the level of autonomy everyone seems to want today.

Comment by Lawrence Dow Duckworth on August 31, 2009 at 1:38pm

Paul,

This excellent piece captures several human nature factors that are evolving rapidly. Some points:

He is right about business being unecessarily dis-jointed from science. Sociobiology neuroscientists have told us any things about why people do what they do, and I see little application of these (thus my in-process book to close the gap). They note that "...and intelligence is said by some to be about 80% genetic after one matures..."

But, the "nurture (environment) vs. nature (genes)" proponents say the environmental factors control. They are both right, as is reflected in the generational differences talked about below. The "art" of leadership is merging and leveraging these two forces to get results. The people being motivated all want success and rewards to perpetuate themselves as driven by the genes but want to get there today by a more open, emotionally self-fulfilling road because they now can...in times of plenty.

The Hawthorne studies, Herzberg and McGregor raised these points in the '40's; as did Mazlow. Few today study and practice these "old" views today; even though they are classics.

Asimov's "psychohistory" talks about that behavior in times of plenty, like these, vs. behavior in times of stress like in the past. Thus, behaviors change with circumstances; and with more plenty-based safety margin = more freedom to explore. If the studies had been of Depression-era or even boomers only subjects, the results-rewards tie even for more esoteric issues would be higher. But Gen Y and Millenials, who grew up in and live in times of plenty versus the past, where much more margin-for-error maneuvering room exists today without incurring disaster, will expect that room to maneuver. They want to be at the esoteric top of Mazlow's "Hierarchy of Needs." The lack of it is a de-motivator as Herzberg identified.

This generational gap is well understood by most at the surface level; and Pink contributes somewhat to the What. My book, EntrePROneur, in process, goes to the underlying Why factors that cause the visible reeactions Pink's piece identified. Leadership levers can then be identified for improved results. These levers include harnessing such generational intrinsic motivators as long as they in the macro contribute to enterprise results being achieved vs. goals, and do not just end up as fun farm anarchy. Doing so is a leadership "art," to manage goals-focused "simultaneous loose and tight properties."

I've observed by living in Europe and traveling extensively in the Pacific areas that we here are more right-brained, pioneering, risk taking, personalizing and intangibly motivated in general; to which some exceptions do prove the rule. Fostering the intangibles around pioneering is critical for us continuing to lead. Disney's and Bill Gate's "imagineering" is a unique value-add differentiation we want to protect and grow. We can outsource the lower value execution details to those that will naturally do them better.

Pink's piece advances the leadership art.

My thoughts.

Larry Duckworth, Chief Education Officer
678-277-4680 office
404-307-0033 cell
www.learn.net

Comment by Patrick Malone on August 31, 2009 at 9:59am

Personally I think the speaker is wrong to limit his presentation on motivation to only financial incentives. When he transitions to what works he fails to mention that autonomy, mastery and purpose are also motivators similar to financial incentives. The secret to motivators is finding out what is important to each individual and then using that to inspire others to higher performance.

He is correct that business overuses financial incentives because business leaders haven't taken the time to understand what motivates the people that work with them. The sports analogy is a good one. Sometimes Belechik and Cowher used a kick in the ass to motivate a player, sometimes it was "purpose" sometimes it was team, sometimes it was financial incentives - it all depended on the individual player involved. "Unity of purpose" is one of the sound bites that have been developed for the media.

Comment by Ron Boggs on August 30, 2009 at 11:12pm

Great leaders in sports are the ones that treat everyone as an individual and use purpose to drive results.

The New England Patriots and Pittsburgh Steelers are examples of successful leadership applying "unity purpose" over individual financial rewards, carrots and sticks to achieve results.

Comment by Paul Terlemezian on August 30, 2009 at 7:49pm

Rick, I am interested in your comments on this video - especially as it relates to our conversation about Toffler's third wave. I wonder if there is one way to motivate performance in the industrial era and a different way in the post-industrialization era.

Bob, as you help CEO's with management styles (most of which were proven to be useful in the 20th century industrialized world) I wonder if a new style is emerging.

Peggy, is this where to look for innovation?

Scott, you've seen so many different companies - what do you think?

Larry, I wonder what your intuition tells you on this?

Pat, set me straight - what do you think?

Ed, this is one to discuss with a beer in one hand and a marsh nearby!

Skip, have you experienced this?

Ron, does it apply to sports and to those of us over 60?

Rom, does this have any relevance to the training world?
Victor, will this play well in Europe?
Jon, has this really been known for as long as he states or is it just an opinion?