DRiVE
DRiVE
by Daniel Pink
by Daniel Pink
Pink structures the book so that it is not only overflowing with incredible information and insight, but extremely easy to use and to reference. He actually provides chapter summaries in part three of the book called "The Type I Toolkit". For this reason I've decided not to create my own in-depth summaries, but to focus more on writing personal reflections that help give applications to my own life.
The essential question that Pink tries to answer is, 'What motivates us?' He exposes the faults of the most common yet outdated motivation method he calls "carrot and stick" or Type E motivation or Motivation 2.0. (Most of Pink's applications are made to the business sector, but can easily cross over into any industry or environment.) The book is divided into three parts. Part one is called "A New Operating System" and de-constructs the old motivation model. Part two is called "The Three Elements" and constructs the basics of the new motivation model that Pink is advocating for. And part three is called "The Type I Toolkit" and it provides a great deal of resources, summaries, strategies, ideas, references and questions to help you apply everything that the book promotes.
Right away, on page two, Pink reveals the axiom of his worldview. When reflecting on a science experiment conducted where monkeys were given a simple mechanical task to achieve he says, "Nobody had taught the monkeys how to remove the pin, slide the hook, and open the cover. Nobody had rewarded them with food, affection, or even quiet applause when they succeeded. And that ran counter to the accepted notions of how primates - including the bigger-brained, less hairy primates known as human beings - behaved" (p.2). The results of the study are used to show that the monkeys displayed a "third drive" in their behavior. Typically, scientist have agreed that there are two drives: the first being biological, which is the internal need for food, water and the satisfaction of carnal urges; and the second being reward-and-punishment, which is an external drive. Thus, in this experiment, the third "DRIVE" is revealed.
I disagree with Pink (and a large portion of the scientific community) that humans evolved from monkeys. I believe that humans are created by God and in the image of God and they are the crown of creation, and therefore unlike animals. The explanation for human behavior is found in the character of God who gave us our minds and our souls and our hearts. We better understand human behavior by better understanding how God has revealed His character in His word and in creation. However, the results of the monkey experiment don't prove we're anymore like monkeys. It just proves that there is something far more significant to behavior than primal instinct and carnal cravings. To me, this is an obvious mark of a Creator, but Pink doesn't embrace that.
In no way does the fact that I'm a Creationist and Pink is an Evolutionist ruin the book, or make it unreadable for me. It only means that the discoveries that Pink filters through his evolutionary worldview, I filter through my Christian worldview. I found the book just as rich and just as profound. It even encouraged me at times to worship God for His magnificent design.
Pink goes on in the introduction to expand on the results of more and similar tests. The results are thought provoking and lead him to his hypothesis. Basically, what scientist once thought were the main driving forces in all human motivation, are not. The old carrot-and-stick or reward-and-punishment model is not what gets people going. In fact, as Pink will show later, rewards and punishment can actually bring about the opposite of their desired effect. The rest of the book is about exploding the old model and replacing it with the new, and how businesses and organizations need to catch up. Pink says, "For too long, there's been a mismatch between what science knows and what business does. The goal of this book is to repair that breach" (p.9).
The last few paragraphs of the introduction set up the remainder of the book with a preview of each part: Part One, Part Two and Part Three. Like I said earlier, Pink makes the book very easy to reference. These paragraphs on pages 9 and 10 provide a comprehensive preview and "Drive: The Recap" on pages 218 to 223 at the end of the book provide comprehensive summaries.
Pink says, "Part One will look at the flaws in our reward-and-punishment system and propose a new way to think about motivation" (p.9). The first example that Pink considers to explode the old motivation model is the rise of Wikipedia and the fall of Microsoft's MSN Encarta. The idea is, Wikipedia, sourced by volunteers - unpaid hobbyists - has risen to become the largest and most popular encyclopedia in the world. All of their contributors, however, are unpaid. MSN Encarta is the big-box mega-company product designed and created by people who were getting paid well. It is interesting to think why the one failed and the other succeeded and what that has to say about human motivation. How is it that unpaid volunteer contributors could create a better product that paid designers? Does this say something about how money might not be the greatest motivator? Pink says, "What happened? The conventional view of human motivation has a very hard time explaining this result" (p.15).
Pink argues that this carrot-and-stick or reward-and-punishment operating system has become deeply ingrained in our society. "For as long as any of us can remember, we've configured our organizations and constructed our lives around this bedrock assumption: The way to improve performance, increase productivity, and encourage excellence is to reward the good and punish the bad" (p.17). It's interesting to think and observe the reality of this around me. I see it in the institutions that I work for and work with. Pink is calling for something different and it's something that is founded upon a much better understanding of human nature and human behavior. To me, this is easily seen and affirmed by the belief that God created human beings with His own communicable attributes, and to ignite drive is to unleash those attributes in alignment with a divine mandate to work and keep (For more insight on the role of men and women and God's mandate to "work and keep", see my notes on "The Masculine Mandate").
Pink finishes chapter one with this recap: "Motivation 2.0 suffers from three compatibility problems. It doesn't mesh with the way many new business models are organizing what we do - because we're intrinsically motivated purpose maximizers, not only extrinsically motivated profit maximizers. It doesn't comport with the way that twenty-first-century economics thinks about what we do - because economists are finally realizing that we're full-fledged human beings, not single-minded economic robots. And perhaps most important, it's hard to reconcile with much of what we actually do at work - because for growing numbers of people, work is often creative, interesting, and self-directed rather than unrelentingly routine, boring, and other-directed. Taken together, these compatibility problems warn us that something's gone awry in our motivational operating system" (p.31).
It's interesting to me to think that the new operating system that Pink is proposing seems directly linked to the rise in occupations that require more creativity and self-direction. Pink talks about the difference between algorithmic work and heuristic work. Traditional societies and their corresponding economies consisted mostly of algorithmic work like farming and factory work. Pink isn't saying that Motivation 2.0 doesn't work in those settings. In fact, chapter 2A is all about situations where carrot-and-stick motivation does work. But more and more work in our modern economy is heuristic, meaning enabling a person to discover or learn something for themselves. Pink quotes consulting firm McKensey & Co. as estimating that "in the United States, only 30 percent of job growth now comes from algorithmic work, while 70 percent comes from heuristic work" (p.28). This shift in the type of work we are doing requires a different motivational operating system. In my own life and work, I am beginning to see which situations are more algorithmic, where Motivation 2.0 can be successful, and which situations are more heuristic, requiring a new method. Heuristic situations far outnumber algorithmic situations.
Chapter 2 discusses seven reasons why carrots and sticks don't work. Here's the chapter summary from the back of the book: "When carrots and sticks encounter our third drive, strange things begin to happen. Traditional "if-then" rewards can give us less of what we want: They can extinguish intrinsic motivation, diminish performance, crush creativity, and crowd out good behavior. They can also give us more of what we don't want: They can encourage unethical behavior, create addictions, and foster short-term thinking. These are the bugs in our current operating system" (p.220).
There are a significant quotes in this chapter that I want to capture here:
"When institutions - families, schools, businesses, and athletic teams, for example - focus on the short-term and opt for controlling people's behavior, they do considerable long-term damage" (p.37).
"For artists, scientists, inventors, school-children, and the rest of us, intrinsic motivation - the drive to do something because it's interesting, challenging, and absorbing - is essential for high levels of creativity" (p.45).
"As the economy moves toward more right-brain, conceptual work (heuristic)... this might be the most alarming gap between what science knows and what business does" (p.45).
Chapter 2A follows up closely behind chapter 2 with "...the Special Circumstances When They Do". That is, the special circumstances when carrot-and-stick motivation does work. Motivation 2.0 as Pink calls it, is the old operating system. But the reality is that this old operating system worked for many years, and it worked well. So the thoughtful response is not to chuck Motivation 2.0 out the window entirely, but to realize the special circumstances when it will work. Understanding that Motivation 2.0 works with algorithmic or routine tasks is the key. Pink says, "...the first question you should ask when contemplating external motivators [is]: Is the task at hand routine?" (p.60). A reward for completing a routine task most often works. And it most often works that the higher the reward, the better or more efficiently the task is completed. Pink also suggests adding these three practices to your carrot dangling: Offer a rationale for why the task is necessary, Acknowledge that the task is boring, Allow people to complete the task their own way.
I found this paragraph interesting: Pink talks about a study where commissioned artwork was compared to noncommissioned artwork and was judged as much less creative than the noncommissioned artwork. Pink says, "A panel of experts, blind to what the investigators were exploring, consistently rated the noncommissioned artwork as more creative. One reason is that several artists said their commissions were "constraining" - that they found themselves working toward a goal they didn't endorse in a manner they didn't control. However, in the same study, Amabile also discovered that when the artists considered their commissions "enabling" - that is, "the commission enabled the artist to do something interesting or exciting" - the creativity ranking of what they produced shot back up" (p.63). I find this interesting because this is exactly how I feel when I cut hair for different people. When someone says "I want this haircut", I feel constrained and less creative. When someone says "Just make it look good", or "I trust you, do whatever you want", I feel free to create and empowered to perform. The second of these two situations always seems to produce better haircuts.
Pink finishes up this chapter with a few more suggestions on how to effectively use rewards. I can picture a few situations where this could come in handy. These final suggestions are as follows. Consider rewarding a job-well-done unexpectedly after it is complete. Pink says, "Holding out a prize at the beginning of a project - and offering it as a contingency - will inevitably focus people's attention on obtaining the reward rather than on attacking the problem. But introducing the subject of rewards after the job is done is less risky" (p.64). Pink calls these rewards "now-that" rewards instead of "if-then" rewards. He also suggests nontangible rewards instead of tangible rewards because "positive feedback can have an enhancing effect on intrinsic motivation". Finally, he seems to say that the more useful and specific the feedback can be, the better. It encourages effort and more creativity. At the end of this chapter are some really helpful flowcharts for navigating rewards-based motivation strategies.
Chapter 3 will wrap up Part One and introduce the phrase the Pink seems to use most for the type of behavior that demands the new operating system. He calls it "Type I" and it means the type that is intrinsic. Here's the chapter summary from the recap in the back of the book: "Motivation 2.0 depended on and fostered Type X behavior - behavior fueled more by extrinsic desires than intrinsic ones and concerned less with the inherent satisfaction of an activity and more with the external rewards to which an activity leads. Motivation 3.0, the upgrade that's necessary for the smooth functioning of twenty-first-century business depends on and fosters Type I behavior. Type I behavior concerns itself less with the external rewards an activity brings and more with the inherent satisfaction of the activity itself. For professional success and personal fulfillment we need to move ourselves and our colleagues from Type X to Type I. 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" (p.221).
Pink consults the work of several scientists, psychologists and doctors along the way. Early in chapter 3 he refers to a conversation with a behavioral scientist named Richard Ryan who, with the help of colleague Edward Deci, fashioned what is called "self-determination theory (SDT)". Pink says, "...we've all got that third drive. It's part of what it means to be human. But whether that aspect of our humanity emerges in our lives depends on whether the conditions around us support it. And the main mechanisms of Motivation 2.0 are more stifling than supportive. 'This is a really big thing in management,' says Ryan. When people aren't producing, companies typically resort to rewards or punishment. 'What you haven't done is the hard work of diagnosing what the problem is. You're trying to run over the problem with a carrot or a stick,' Ryan explains. That doesn't mean that SDT unequivocally opposes rewards. 'Of course, they're necessary in workplaces and other settings,' says Deci. 'But the less salient they are made, the better. When people use rewards to motivate, that's when they're most demotivating.' Instead, Deci and Ryan say we should focus our efforts on creating environments for our innate psychological needs to flourish" (p.70). This section is worth reflecting on for two reasons. First, there is another reference to "what it means to be human", which to me is another clear evidence for the design of a Creator. Evolutionary theories are insufficient to fully explain why human behavior is so meaningful and complex. Creationism explains these complexities in it's essence and adds even more value and amazement to the nature of human life and behavior. Second, Richard Ryan makes a statement that must be reflected upon personally. When speaking of the typical method of slapping on an extrinsic solution to an intrinsic problem he says, "What you haven't done is the hard work of diagnosing what the problem is" (p.70). This statement is extremely significant and an indictment on most leaders. I have seen, both in myself and in leaders around me, that the most common response to a problem is an extrinsic, or external modification. This is easier than the "hard work of diagnosing what the problem is". The problem with poor motivation in most cases is some form of internal pain or loss or brokenness that manifests itself in external behavior. Unfortunately, most people will seek to solve the external behavior defects with external behavior modifications, aka carrots and sticks. The hard work is diving in to the problem and determining the true diagnosis. It's seeking to understand someone at the "heart level". I think 3D Coaching and the FCA Coaches Academy do one of the best jobs of describing this and proposing solutions: Course 201:1-Motivation I and Course 201:2-Motivation II. Pink goes on to say that Deci and Ryan have established a network of several dozen SDT scholars conducting research in multiple countries and across just about every realm. Pink says, "They have produced hundreds of research papers, most of which point to the same conclusion. Human beings have an innate inner drive to be autonomous, self-determined, and connected to one another. And when that drive is liberated, people achieve more and live richer lives" (p.71).
In order to properly introduce his new behavior nomenclature, Pink spends a couple pages explaining the work of cardiologist, Meyer Friedman and MIT management professor, Douglas McGregor. Friedman is the man responsible for the terms commonly used today, Type A and Type B personalities. McGregor is responsible for the management theories commonly used today, Theory X and Theory Y. Both of these theories from Friedman and McGregor move us in a better understanding of human behavior. Pink then says, "So with a hoist from Meyer Friedman onto the shoulders of Douglas McGregor, I'd like to introduce my own alphabetic way to think about human motivation" (p.75).
Here then is Pink's description of the the essential premise of the whole book. This is his argument, his proposal. He says, "The Motivation 2.0 operating system depended on, and fostered, what I call Type X behavior. Type X behavior is fueled more by extrinsic desires than intrinsic ones. It concerns itself less with the inherent satisfaction of an activity and more with the external rewards to which that activity leads. The Motivation 3.0 operating system - the upgrade that's needed to meet the new realities of how we organize, thing about, ad do what we do - depends on what I call Type I behavior. Type I behavior is fueled more by intrinsic desires that extrinsic ones. It concerns itself less with the external rewards to which an activity leads and more with the inherent satisfaction of the activity itself. At the center of Type X behavior is the second drive. At the center of Type I behavior is the third drive. If we want to strengthen our organizations, get beyond our decade of underachievement, and address the inchoate sense that something's gone wrong in our businesses, our lives and our world, we need to move from Type X to Type I. (I use these two letters for the 'x' in extrinsic and the 'i' in intrinsic as well as to pay homage to Douglas McGregor)" (p.75-76).
Pink finishes the chapter with a preview of the next part of the book. He says, "Ultimately, Type I behavior depends on three nutrients: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Type I behavior is self-directed. It is devoted to becoming better and better at something that matters. And it connects that quest for excellence to a larger purpose". He then claims, "it is also critical for professional, personal, and organizational success of any kind... So let's get started." (p.79). Here comes Part Two.
After deconstructing Motivation 2.0 and presenting a compelling case for a new operating system in Part One, Pink now dives in to the "three nutrients" that make up the building blocks of Motivation 3.0. They are Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose. Part Two of the book devotes a chapter to each one, in that order.
"Drive: The Recap" summary of chapter four says this, "Our 'default setting' is to be autonomous and self-directed. Unfortunately, circumstances - including outdated notions of 'management' - often 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. People need autonomy over task (what they do), time (when they do it), team (who they do it with), and technique (how they do it). Organizations that have found inventive, sometimes radical, ways to boost autonomy are outperforming their competitors" (p.222).
Use of the word "default setting" is based on the belief that this characteristic of Autonomy is inherent in human nature and human behavior. Every human being naturally has a desire to be "autonomous", that is, having self-government, acting independently or having the freedom to do so. As a Christian who looks to Scripture to illuminate the truth about the world and human behavior, do I agree with this claim? I think the Christian worldview, based on the Bible, can give full explanation to this theory. There are a few explicit and absolute truths that can help determine parameters (measurable factors forming a set that defines a system or sets the conditions of operation) for thinking about and understanding this claim. First, the natural condition of every human being is one that is enslaved to sin and therefore all human behavior in is originally governed by sin, unless acted upon by the Spirit of God by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ to liberate a person from enslavement to sin, create in them a new, reborn nature so as to change the governing forces of their nature where they are no longer enslaved to sin, but enslaved to righteousness through the indwelling Holy Spirit. This would be the Christian view of human nature and there are only two possible options for the condition of a person's nature - "old" or "new", "perishing" or "saved", "dead" or "alive", etc. Second, every human being is created by God to be unique. God has made no two people alike, therefore no two people will have the exact same behavior, nor or they meant to be treated that way. Instead each individual person is to be celebrated for their uniqueness and the "gifts" that they possess in that uniqueness. Every person's unique gifts are designed by God to be exercised, employed and maximized in serving the world and the community of people in which that person resides. Thirdly, God gives mankind creative and cognitive freedom to make decisions and holds man responsible for those decisions. God exercises absolute sovereign control over all things in the universe, so man never acts outside of God's control, but within God's control, man has been given the ability to make independent decisions. In that sense, man has "autonomy", but it is limited autonomy, not total autonomy. His [man's] will is not "free", but it is limited.
Based on these Christian truths I think it is possible to understand and explain the claim that all human beings have a "default setting" to be autonomous and self-directed. I think it is obvious when observing human behavior, as Pink has, that everyone has the desire naturally to be self-directed. Everyone has the desire to explore, experience and exercise their uniqueness. This is a glorious characteristic of God's multifaceted creative design. So every person is naturally on a self-directed quest to understand and satisfy and love and express their own "self". To take this away is to crush the human spirit. However, according to the Christian worldview, the only full realization and celebration of "self" can be found in reconciliation to its Creator. Apart from union with Christ and reconciliation to your created order in relationship and conformity to your Creator, the drive for self actualization and fullness cannot be attained. The Gospel of Christianity is the news that this can be achieved and fully experienced by grace through faith in Jesus Christ in a reconciled relationship to God.
So, the "default setting to be autonomous and self-directed" is real. It is best understood and explained by God. And there are a lot of really good things in this chapter.
One of those things is the concept of a ROWE, introduced right at the beginning of the chapter. A ROWE is a Results-Only Work Environment. The idea is that employees are responsible only for their results, and therefore their time in the office is not managed. Pink says, "They show up then they want. They don't have to be in the office at a certain time - or any time, for that matter. They just have to get their work done. How they do it, when they do it, and where they do it is up to them" (p.84). The CEO who is the main subject of this case makes a great statement about management. His name is Jeff Gunther and he says, "Management isn't about walking around and seeing if people are in their offices... It's about creating conditions for people to do their best work" (p.84). It's important to note that Gunther's staff "consists of software developers, designers, and others doing high-level creative work" (p.85). "For them, it's all about craftsmanship. And they need a lot of autonomy," Gunther says (p.85).
I have personally begun to implement a ROWE into my work schedule. In my current position, I am very much my own manager. At least, when it comes to weekly tasks and objectives. So at the beginning of the week I will determine the priority results that I must see by the end of the week. Then, I give myself the freedom of schedule to accomplish them. I like this, and will continue to do it, but I have found that, in order for this to be effective I must define very clear goals. The desired results must be specific. If I were managing other people I would be sure to do this. I would be sure to make the results and expectations as clear as possible and make sure that all parties involved understand and agree upon the expectations. (Listen to "Interdisciplinary Lessons From The Marines" by David "Bull" Gurfein.)
The next section of chapter 4 is a fascinating section that addresses the modern concept of "management". It's called "Players Or Pawns?" and it begins on page 86. It begins by making the claim that "management" is an outdated technology. As Pink has said already, this outdated technology is, at the most, totally disconnected from our true human nature and behavior and, at the least, detrimental to motivation and human thriving in our modern, nonroutine, right-brained economy that most of the world operates in. Pink lobbies for the claim that autonomy (active, engaged, self-directed, curious...) is our nature as humans. I agree that people thrive when they are in environments that "reawaken their deep-seated sense of autonomy" (p.87). People are able to be their best when they are liberated, celebrated, motivated, maximized... But, important to note is the difference between independence and autonomy. Pink returns to the findings of Deci and Ryan to explain the difference. "Autonomy, as they see it, is different from independence. It's not the rugged, go-it-alone, rely-on-nobody individualism of the American cowboy. It means acting with choice - which means we can be both autonomous and happily interdependent with others. And while the idea of independence has national and political reverberations, autonomy appears to be a human concept rather than a western one. Researchers have found a link between autonomy and overall well-being not only in North America and Western Europe, but also in Russia, Turkey, and South Korea. Even in high-poverty non-Western locales like Bangladesh, social scientists have found that autonomy is something that people seek and that improves their lives" (p.88). Pink goes on to share the results of research that says that autonomous motivation promotes greater success in a multitude of fields. Pink finishes the section with this statement, "This era doesn't call for better management. It calls for a renaissance of self-direction" (p.90).
I wrote a note in the book saying, "Where can I encourage greater autonomy for myself and others?" I am always working with people and especially working on teams. It would be valuable to think about a strategy for promoting as must autonomous motivation and self-discovery as possible. While working for a Christian ministry and spending most of my hours in ministry environments, I'm asking the question, "Did Jesus model ministry and relationships that encouraged self-discovery?" Before I go on designing ministry strategy based on the work of Daniel Pink, my most important queues come from the King of the Universe, Jesus Christ. Does His life and ministry reveal the same understanding about human nature and behavior that Pink is advocating for? This may be the most important question I can ask as I digest this whole book.
My first thought goes to the account of Jesus and His interaction with "the woman at the well" in John 4. In this interaction, Jesus engages with the woman and leads her carefully down a path of self-discovery, or what I often refer to as self-revelation, which I think is the same thing. It can also be said of Jesus's most common form of teaching that He encouraged self-revelation or self-discovery. His parables were specifically designed so that only some would discover and understand their truth (Matthew 13:10-11). His teaching was careful, often in the form of a question so that those who listed would have to supply the answer that they were seeking. Jesus also gave opportunity for the disciples to do the work He was doing as part of their training. They were never independent of Him or of each other, but they had "freedom" and even more importantly were commanded to go and to do the work of the Gospel on their own. This question is worth more thought.
Pink spends the reminder of the chapter talking about the Four Essentials of Autonomy. They are Task, Time, Technique and Team. In order for autonomous motivation to work best, you must provide in your leadership as much freedom for self-determination as possible in these four ares. Pink expands them a little as "four aspects of work: what people do, when they do it, how they do it, and whom they do it with" (p.91-92). Pink gives several examples of companies that have created self-directed time within their workweek schedules. The results have been awesome. It makes me think, How can I make room for "my people" to have ample self-directed time in FCA and in coaching? This time needs to be specific enough that people are still making progress toward the greater goal and objective of the organization, but otherwise it can be very flexible. It also makes me think, How can I make room for myself to have ample self-directed time? A quote from the chapter is provoking to think about. It says, "Nothing is more important to my success than controlling my schedule. I'm most creative from five to nine A.M. If I had a boss or co-workers, they would ruin my best hours one way or another" (Scott Adams, Dilbert creator, quoted on page 97). One way to make room for self-direction or autonomy is to have the freedom to create my schedule. This would be autonomy over Time. It can be as simple as this: I know when I work best, therefore I will schedule my best work during my best time. Some people might work best in the morning and some at night. This is one way to maximize people. Here is another great quote from the chapter: "If we begin from an alternative, and more accurate, presumption - that people want to do good work - then we ought to let them focus on the work itself rather than the time it takes them to do it" (p.98).
This is one of my favorite quotes from the chapter: "We should focus on what people get done, not how many hours or days worked" (p.99). I like this statement because it addresses an issue in me that is about far more than just time or task management. It speaks to an issue of personal identity and value. I find, as I think many people do, that I attach a great deal of my own personal value to my productivity. I become consumed with "doing things" in order to slake a thirst for affirmation and self-worth. I can sometimes feel like I'm a more valuable employee because I simply "put in a lot of hours". Even worse, I can feel like I'm more important than someone else because I'm working more hours or "super busy". As I confess these things, I realize how foolish they are, but strangely it is the mode of operation for many people. Simply giving people, and myself, more autonomy over work is not the solution to this identity/value crisis, however. Work should never be a quest to prove your value. Value is given because a person is created in the image of God and the specific love that God has for His children. This priority truth will lay a foundation for effective productivity - detaching my value from my work frees me from the pressure to keep up massive production, which then liberates me to focus not on how much I work, but the joy of working and creating something meaningful.
Pink closes the chapter with a section called "The Art of Autonomy". In it he makes a great statement, "encouraging autonomy doesn't mean discouraging accountability" (p.105). This is critical in order to still achieve goals. He then goes on to expand on this and make another claim about human nature. He says, "Motivation 3.0 begins with a different assumption. It presumes that people want to be accountable - and that making sure they have control over their task, their time, their technique, and their team is the most effective pathway to that destination" (p.105).
He also makes this important statement "...different individuals will prize different aspects of autonomy... Different individuals have different desires, so that best strategy for an employer would be to figure out what's important to each individual employee" (p.106). This is similar to what was said earlier about "doing the hard work" of getting to know your people. As you learn them, and learn how they tick, you are better able to serve and empower them based on what you know they desire most.
Mastery is the second of the three elements of Motivation 3.0. "Drive: The Recap" at the back of the book, summarizes chapter 5 with this statement: "While Motivation 2.0 required compliance, Motivation 3.0 demands engagement. Only engagement can produce mastery - becoming better at something that matters. And the pursuit of mastery, an important but often dormant part of our third drive, has become essential to making one's way in the economy. Indeed, making progress in one's work turns out to be the single most motivating aspect of many jobs. Mastery begins with "flow" - optimal experiences when the challenges we face are exquisitely matched to our abilities. Smart workplaces therefore supplement day-to-day activities with "Goldilocks tasks" - not too hard and not too easy. But mastery also abides by three peculiar rules. 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. And mastery is an asymptote: It's impossible to fully realize, which makes it simultaneously frustrating and alluring" (p.222-223).
The first element of Autonomy is necessary to really experience the second element of Mastery. Pink says, "The opposite of autonomy is control... Control leads to compliance; autonomy leads to engagement. And this distinction leads to the second element of Type I behavior: mastery - the desire to get better and better at something that matters" (p.108-109). So the idea of engagement is a critical component to cultivating Mastery. Pink says this, "Solving complex problems requires an inquiring mind and the willingness to experiment one's way to a fresh solution" (p.109). Engagement is the experience where you are engrossed in the activity or task. The task pulls you in and demands your interest and attention. As Pink says in "The Recap", engagement is also found at the threshold of impossible. Reaching for something that is at the fingertips of your full arms length is the sweet spot of engagement.
Pink develops this concept with the help of the work of psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. He begins with what he refers to as an autotelic experience. This is an activity where "the goal is self-fulfilling; the activity is its own reward" (p.111). This is that sweet spot where you're in the zone of performance and engagement. Csikszentmihalyi came to call this "flow". "[H]e found people using [flow] to describe these optimal moments... The highest, most satisfying experiences in people's lives were when they are in flow" (p.112). So the goal is to find a state of flow. That's the zone of engagement and the fertile soil where Mastery grows.
Here's a great quote: "Most important, in flow, the relationship between what a person had to do and what he could do was perfect. The challenge wasn't too easy. Nor was it too difficult. (Which is what Pink will later refer to as a "Goldilocks Task"). It was a notch or two beyond his current abilities, which stretched the body and mind in a way that made the effort itself the most delicious reward. That balance produced a degree of focus and satisfaction that easily surpassed other, more quotidian, experiences. In flow, people lived so deeply in the moment, and felt so utterly in control, that their sense of time, place, and even self melted away. They are autonomous, of course. But more that that, they were engaged. They were, as poet W.H. Auden wrote, 'forgetting themselves in a function' " (p.113). I have experienced flow myself, and it truly is "delicious".
"The desire to do something because you find it deeply satisfying and personally challenging inspires the highest levels of creativity, whether it's in the arts, sciences, or business," says Harvard University Professor, Teresa Amabile (p.114). "In addition, a study of 11,000 industrial scientists and engineers working at companies in the United States found that the desire for intellectual challenge - that is, the urge to master something new and engaging - was the best predictor of productivity" (p.115). So the challenge for managers (or coaches, teachers, supervisors, leaders...) is "to adjust assignments to help them [your people] find flow" (p.115). This is the challenge of finding the Goldilocks Task - not too hot and not too cold. Like baby-bear's porridge. Tasks that are too hot - that exceed a person's capabilities - lead to frustration. And tasks that are too cold, or too easy, lead to boredom.
This concept of the Goldilocks Task was also a major point in the book "The Talent Code" by Daniel Coyle. He identifies it as the sweet spot of skill development. It is that point where you have to struggle through the skill until you get it. In his section about "Deep Practice" Coyle says this, "Deep practice is built on a paradox: struggling in certain targeted ways - operating at the edges of your ability, where you make mistakes - makes you smarter" (The Talent Code, p.18). It sounds like the same concept that Pink is identifying. The cool thing is that the findings of Pink and Coyle can be combined to paint a full picture of the sweet spot for a teacher-student/coach-athlete/employer-employee/tutor-pupil relationship. Essentially, this sweet spot is the point where the coach is being most effective in teaching a skill and it is also the point where the athlete is experiencing the most progress, productivity and fulfillment. So it should be the desire of everyone involved to find this sweet spot. Everyone knows those are the experiences that produce a "great session".
"Flow is essential to mastery. But flow doesn't guarantee mastery," Pink says. This is the next important development in the concept of Mastery. "...because the two concepts operate on different horizons of time. One happens in a moment; the other unfolds over months, years, sometimes decades" (p.118). Flow is that "Deep Practice" that you can experience in a single session (short-term), but Mastery is a long term undertaking - even life-long in its truest sense. So, it is like Flow is an indicator that a single session is making progress toward Mastery. Mastery is like the journey across a bridge that is made of stepping stones of individual sessions, each of which is primarily characterized by Flow.
So the question that Pink asks to zoom out on the concept at hand - Mastery - and understand how Flow fits in is, "So how can we enlist flow in the quest for something that goes deeper and endures longer? What can we do to move toward mastery, one of the key elements of Type I behavior...?" (p.118). Pink immediately answers his question by saying, "A few behavioral scientist have offered some initial answers to those questions, and their findings suggest that mastery abides by three, somewhat peculiar, laws" (p.118).
"The Three Laws of Mastery":
Mastery is a Mindset
Mastery is a Pain
Mastery is an Asymptote
This section might be one of my favorite in the book. "Mastery is a Mindset" is a fascinating section that I could probably quote at length because all of it is so thought provoking. The essential statement is "What people believe shapes what people achieve" (p.118). This is expanded upon with the help of the work of famous psychology professor, Carol Dweck. The theory holds that a person can have one of two mindsets when it comes to their intelligence or ability. One is called "entity theory" or "fixed mindset" and one is called "incremental theory" or "growth mindset". Pink analogizes it like this, "Want to get stronger and more muscular? Start pumping iron (incremental theory). Want to get taller? You're out of luck (entity theory)" (p.119). One mindset is growth oriented and one is fixed oriented. You can see how only one of these mindsets is conducive to Mastery.
Two statements from the section that I must capture:
"If you believe intelligence is a fixed quantity, then every educational and professional encounter becomes a measure of how much you have. If you believe intelligence is something you can increase, then the same encounters become opportunities for growth. In one view, intelligence is something you demonstrate; in the other, it's something you develop" (p.119).
"Indeed, the two self-theories take very different views of effort. To incremental theorists, exertion is positive. Since incremental theorists believe that ability is malleable, they see working harder as a way to get better. By contrast, says Dewck, 'the entity theory... is a system that requires a dies of easy successes.' In this schema, if you have to work hard, it means you're not very good. People therefore choose easy targets that, then hid affirm their existing abilities but do little to expand them. In a sense, entity theorists want to look like masters without expending the effort to attain mastery" (p.120).
You can imagine how the two theories respond differently to adversity. It's interesting to me and worth giving a lot of thought to determining how I can cultivate a growth mindset, not only personally (which I think would be simple), but more so in others. How can I get my student-athletes to believe that they have an unlimited ability/opportunity to grow their own skill and intelligence? Essentially, I want them to believe that there is no limit to how much they can improve - there is no limit to how much they can grow. AND THEN, I want them to LOVE THE PROCESS. It is a dangerous combination when someone believes that they have no limit to their growth (they can truly get better every single day) AND they love the process of growing. That is a person who is swiftly on their way to Mastery. This second characteristic of loving the process, or loving the "grind" is basically the second of the Three Laws of Mastery - Mastery is a Pain.
"Grit" is defines as "perseverance and passion for long-term goals" (p.122). The basic idea is that Mastery is a struggle. It's hard. And they only way to achieve Mastery is to endure the struggle, perhaps even more so to embrace the struggle and "grit" your way through it. This is also a key concept in Daniel Coyle's concept of Deep Practice in "The Talent Code", which I have quoted already. The best practice is marked by living on the cliff of failure. You must find your limit and beat against it until that horizon is expanded, even just a little bit. This is the pain of Mastery. Living on the constant edge of your current capacity is hard, but it's the only way to grow.
The final of the three laws is described in an interesting, but perfect way - "Mastery is an Asymptote". An asymptote is a straight line that a curve approaches but never quite reaches. It's a concept from algebra. Pink says frankly that you, or anyone else will never fully attain Mastery. Is this then a discouragement? It could be, but that's where a person must realize that it is not the destination that matters most, it's the journey. It's the growth toward Mastery that they love, not the Mastery itself. This is a unique attitude to have. Pink says this, "The mastery asymptote is a source of frustration Why reach for something you can never fully attain? But it's also a source of allure. Why not reach for it? The joy is in the pursuit more than the realization. In the end, mastery attracts precisely because mastery eludes" (p.125).
The final section of Mastery is a positive one. Pink seeks to prove how Flow is the "oxygen of the soul". In an experiment where a group of people were asked to eliminate all activities that were "noninstrumental", or activities where they experienced enjoyment, aka activities that involved Flow. Within 48 hours the effects were quite harmful. Pink says this, "Two days. Forty-eight hours without flow plunged people into a state eerily similar to a serious psychiatric disorder. The experiment suggests that flow, the deep sense of engagement that Motivation 3.0 calls for, isn't a nicety. It's a necessity. We need it to survive. It is the oxygen of the soul" (p.127). One of the other surprising findings what that "people are much more likely to reach that flow state at work than in leisure" (p.127).
A few final quotes can help make application to daily life:
"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 progress, organizations can help their own cause and enrich people's lives" (p.127-128).
"There is no reason to believe any longer that only irrelevant 'play' can be enjoyed, while the serious business of life must be borne 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" (quote by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, p.128).
Finally, the third of three of the building blocks of Motivation 3.0, Purpose. "Drive: The Recap" summarizes the chapter this way: "Humans, by their nature, seek purpose - to make a contribution and to e part of a cause greater and more enduring than themselves. But traditional businesses have long considered purpose ornamental - a perfectly nice accessory, so long as it didn't get in the way of the important things. But that's changing - thanks in part to the rising tide of aging Baby-Boomers reckoning with their own mortality. In Motivation 3.0, purpose maximization is taking its place alongside profit maximization as an aspiration and a guiding principle. Within organizations, this new 'purpose motive' is expressing itself in three ways: in goals that use profit to reach purpose; in words that emphasize more than self-interest; and in policies that allow people to pursue purpose on their own terms. This move to accompany profit maximization with purpose maximization has the potential to rejuvenate our businesses and remake out world" (p.223).
The chapter begins, and as The Recap states, with a look at "the largest demographic cohort in most western countries" - Baby-Boomers. Pink says, at the time the book was written and until 2024, that "in America alone, one hundred boomers turn sixty every thirteen minutes" (p.131). Why is this significant and what does it have to do with Purpose? Pink claims that as the clock strikes 60 for this demographic of people they ask significant purpose-of-life, make-a-difference-in-the-world, legacy type questions. This Purpose quest by the largest demographic in America (and in many other countries) is changing the economic and social landscape. Pink says, "When the cold front of demographics meets the warm front of unrealized dreams, the result will be a thunderstorm of purpose the likes of which the world has never seen" (p.131).
Pink's argument for the necessity for one to have a sense of Purpose to make the most of work and life is not based only on the current trends of one demographic cohort - as if the Baby-Boomers are the only ones asking these questions - but it does make the case for the reality that people desire to find AND contribute to something significant in their lives. I think everyone would agree that the quest for Purpose is a characteristic of humankind and has been since the beginning. "Purpose" is the word Pink uses, which is appropriate and probably elicits the same idea in most everyone, but he doesn't necessarily provide a concise definition for it. Asking the question about Purpose cuts straight to the heart of identity and worldview. It pops the hood to reveal the engine of belief. Everyone holds some conviction about Purpose, even if they've never tried to give words to an explanation. I think Pink intentionally leaves his definition of Purpose open. Perhaps he believes that everyone should feel the freedom to identify their own sense of Purpose and then find the best way to fulfill it. This is the prevailing spirit of the age we're in anyway - Postmodernism. I feel differently. But the point of the chapter is not to define Purpose, but to examine the role Purpose plays in motivation. So I'll stay on that level, for now.
Here is a good quote that captures the role Purpose plays in its relation to the other two Motivation 3.0 elements: "The first two legs of the Type I tripod, autonomy and mastery, are essential. But for proper balance we need a third leg - purpose, which provides a context for its two mates. Autonomous people working toward mastery perform at very high levels. But those who do so in the service of some greater objective can achieve even more. The most deeply motivated people - not to mention those who are most productive and satisfied - hitch their desires to a cause larger than themselves" (p.131). I think that may be the most specific definition that Pink gives to the concept of Purpose: "a cause greater than yourself". This works well in the context of his thesis.
It seems that the main point is Purpose > Profit when it comes to motivation. Purpose Maximization is a quality of Type I. Profit Maximization is a quality of Type E and isn't optimal - it's outmoded. Pink says, "Motivation 3.0 doesn't reject profits, but it places equal emphasis on purpose maximization" (p.133). Pink then says, "We see the first stirrings of this new purpose motive in three realms of organizational life - goals, words, and policies" (p.133). He then spends most of the chapter unpacking these three things.
Goals are shaped by Purpose. Your sense of Purpose will shape your goals. (And your goals shape your practice, therefore your Purpose shapes your practice. This is a classic syllogism, which further reveals the importance of Purpose.) This is undeniable, and it's showing up in more and more enterprises. It explains why companies who have only profit as their purpose will often resort to unethical practices - it's all about maximizing profit, no matter the method. Pink focuses on some organizations that are changing the scene. He says about enterprises such as TOMS that, "The aims of these Motivation 3.0 companies are not to chase profit while trying to stay ethical and law-abiding. Their goal is to pursue purpose - and to use profit as the catalyst rather than the objective" (p.135). So rather than having the purpose be profits, the profits are used to meet the goal, which is aimed at a greater purpose. This creates a healthy context for profit. It also creates a sense of stewardship of those profits. It answers the question "What are these profits for?" The same thing can be applied to my own personal stewardship of my wealth. The way I spend my money reveals my sense of Purpose (which is all interwoven with motive and goals, etc.). Goals, whether they are those of an individual or an organization, always mark a trail that points to Purpose.
The second "realm of organizational life" where Purpose is detectable is in Words. Pink says, "Words matter. And if you listen carefully, you might begin to hear a slightly different - slightly more purpose-oriented - dialect" (p.137). Words always reveal Purpose in that "Out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks" (Luke 6:45). What Pink is getting at is that the words that reveal a Motivation 3.0 type of Purpose are different, more transcendent than those of Motivation 2.0. The next paragraph captures this perfectly: "Gary Hamel, whom I mentioned above, says, 'The goals of management are usually described in words like 'efficiency,' 'advantage,' 'value,' 'superiority,' 'focus,' and 'differentiation.' Important as these objectives are, they lack the power to rouse human hearts.' Business leaders, he says, 'must find ways to infuse mundane business activities with deeper, soul-stirring ideals, such as honor, truth, love, justice, and beauty.' Humanize what people say and you may well humanize what they do" (p.137). Right away, Hamel links goals and Purpose. The goals of Motivation 2.0 and the old ways of "management" were usually articulated in those words that Hamel uses: efficiency, advantage, value, etc. Words point to goals; goals point to Purpose. The movement of Motivation 3.0 is towards words that are more significant; words that "rouse human hearts". Like Pink has said, this points to Purpose far greater than personal profit and self.
A simple, yet powerful way to ignite Purpose in work and strike the Motivation 3.0 cord is focusing on "WHY". Pink says that it "is perhaps the most underused word in the modern workplace" (p.137). But "This three-letter interrogative packs enormous power". "In business, we tend to obsess over the 'how' - as in 'Here's how to do it.' Yet we rarely discuss the 'why' - as in 'Here's why we're doing it.' But it's often difficult to do something exceptionally well if we don't know the reasons we're doing it in the first place. people at work are thirsting for context, yearning to know that what they do contributes to a larger whole. And a powerful way to provide that context is to spend a little less time telling how and a little more time showing why" (p.138). I'm reminded of Simon Sinek's "Golden Circle". And "The Talent Code" by Daniel Coyle talks about the importance of words in igniting and sustaining motivation: "[The] signals we use most [are] words" (The Talent Code, p.132). The words we use are extremely important. It would be a valuable skill to develop your ability to use words well. "Death and life are in the power of the tongue" (Proverbs 18:21).
"Between the words businesses use and the goals they seek sit the policies they implement to turn the former into the latter" (p.138). Policies can attempt to fabricate purpose or they can unleash it. Pink obviously will make the case for the latter. When companies try to force Purpose in the form of ethics, it become box-checking. The main point of this short section seems to be "give the power to the people". Providing autonomy to individuals over company/organizational policies creates ownership and buy-in - it actually means something. I'm dreaming about what it could look like for me to give power and autonomy to my "people" to create team policy that aims at team purpose. Pink concludes the section with research findings that should be obvious to us if we think about them, but unfortunately are not the norm for our culture. Basically, people who pursue "purpose goals" and focus on relationships, personal growth and meaningful contributions to society are far happier than people who pursue "profit goals". In fact, the unquenchable pursuit of profit often leads people into worse personal well-being. The world promises happiness in materialistic profit and too many people have bought this lie. "Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions", Jesus says (Luke 12:15)... "Instead, seek His kingdom, and these things will be added to you. Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" (Luke 12:31-34).
Pink provides a conclusion for the book that is powerful, and I've decided to quote it at length:
"A central idea of this book has been the mismatch between what science knows and what business does. The gap is wide. Its existence is alarming. And though closing it seems daunting, we have reasons to be optimistic.
The scientists who study human motivation, several of whom we've encountered in this book, offer us a sharper and more accurate account of both human performance and the human condition. The truths they've revealed are simple, yet powerful. The science shows that those typical twentieth-century carrot-and-stick motivators - which we consider somehow a 'natural' part of human enterprise - can sometimes work. But they're effective in only a surprisingly narrow band of circumstances. The science shows that 'if-then' rewards - the mainstays of the Motivation 2.0 operating system - not only are ineffective in many situations, but also can crush the high-level, creative, conceptual abilities that are central to current and future economic and social progress. The science shows that the secret to high performance isn't our biological drive or our reward-and-punishment drive, but our third drive - our deep-seated desire to direct our own lives, to extend and expand our abilities, and to make a contribution.
Bringing our businesses in sync with these truths won't be easy. Unlearning old ideas is difficult, undoing old habits even harder. And I'd be less sanguine about the prospects of closing the motivation gap anytime soon, if it weren't for this: The science confirms that we already know in our hearts.
We know that human beings are not merely smaller, slower, better-smelling donkeys trudging after that day's carrot. We know - if we've spent time with young children or remember ourselves at our best - that we're not destined to be passive and compliant. We're designed to be active and engaged. And we know that the richest experiences in our lives aren't when we're clamoring for validation from others, but when we're listening to our own voice - doing something that matters, doing it well, and doing it in the service of a cause larger than ourselves.
So, in the end, repairing the mismatch and bringing our understanding of motivation into the twenty-first century is more than an essential move for business. It's an affirmation of our humanity" (p.144-145).
I've referenced this a few times already, but it's extremely helpful and thought provoking. Pink says that the toolkit "is your guide to taking the ideas in this book and putting them into action" (p.149). Going through the toolkit myself will be a useful exercise and something I plan to do separate from this review. But here are the different sections found in the toolkit so you can get an idea of all the ways that the ideas in the book can be put into action:
Type I for Individuals: Nine Strategies for Awakening Your Motivation
Type I for Organizations: Thirteen Ways to Improve Your Company, Office, or Group
The Zen of Compensation: Paying People the Type I Way
The Zen of Compensation Reconsidered: Are Salespeople Different?
Type I for Parents and Educators: Ten Ideas for Helping Our Kids
The Type I Reading List: Fifteen Essential Books
Listen to the Gurus: Seven Business Thinkers Who Get It
The Type I Fitness Plan: Four Tips for Getting (and Staying) Motivated to Exercise
Drive: The Recap
Drive: The Glossary
The Drive Discussion Guide: Twenty Conversation Starters to Keep You Thinking and Talking
Find Out More - About Yourself and This Topic