Behavior Here, Behavior There, Behavior Everywhere
February 5th, 2010It seems that everywhere you look these days there is a lot more emphasis on understanding our behaviors and how they influence numerous fields of study. From economics and buying behaviors to drives and motivations in the workplace, we’ve only just begun to scratch the surface of what the science and study of behavior can teach us.
Take for instance Daniel Ariely’s book, Predictably Irrational – Ariely puts forth an entertaining, often humorous, introduction to the field of behavioral economics and sheds lights on some of the stranger things we do depending on the situations we’re placed in – like why we might like vinegar in our beer if we try it before we’re told it’s there, but almost always dislike if we’re told it’s there first. Ariely seems to spend much time in the field comparing patterns of behavior from one group to another to make blanket, statistical conclusions of how we will predict in similar scenarios.
Aubrey Daniels’ book Oops! 13 Management Practices That Waste Time & Money also examines behaviors in a business context, but here frames the discussion around common management tools and practices that don’t actually produce the desired results. Daniels explores a spectrum of positive and negative reinforcers that influence (or fail to influence) performance. A full palette of near and long-term views, certain and uncertain rewards and punishments and our reactions to them become the foundation for advising businesses how to get practical performance improvements.
Somewhere between these two books lies Drive by Daniel Pink. Pink posits that there are 3 iterations of motivational “operating systems” that humans have evolved. Motivation 1.0 is based on basic, animalistic needs, drives to survive and procreate and not much else. Motivation 2.0 represents the fabled carrot and stick – using rewards and punishments to encourage desired behaviors and discourage unwanted ones. Motivation 3.0 has just begun to take root – an understanding that humans are governed by both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Some things we do for passion and intellectual curiosity, other things we do for money, or to avoid being fired. As our world gets more complicated and our tasks more intellectually sophisticated so too does the complexity of our motivational drives. But Pink contends that as Motivation 3.0 is better understood we will see new paradigms in the workplace.
All three of these books offer fascinating perspectives on how we behave, how predictable we can be, and how to reevaluate motivational strategies. However, all of these books tend to lump human behavior together with little granularity regarding natural styles. Pink does put forth the idea of Type I’s and Type X’s to connote persons more intrinsically or extrinsically motivated, while Ariely and Daniels tend to pay more attention to the external circumstances and stimuli and their impact on an entire group rather than the individual’s. It would be fascinating to explore all of these concepts through the lens of DISC and the study of Passions & Priorities to provide other vectors for understanding individual’s reactions and behavioral dispositions rather than just focusing on cumulative results. There are excellent tools already available like Workplace Motivators which were specifically designed to analyze and define the very factors that mesh so well with Pink’s definition of Motivation 3.0.
Tags: behavior, books, DISC, workplace motivation
February 16th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
First, thanks for mentioning OOPs. Second, you cannot change group behavior without understanding individual behavior. Third, I am not a fan of Dan Pink. See my blog: aubreydanielsblog.com (Drive Me Crazy). I mention that because you said that I deal with external environment and stimuli. While that is correct, it is not complete. I am trying to understand human behavior wherever it occurs. Pink seems to think that he, or Deci, discovered intrinsic motivation. I am just as concerned with intrinsic reinforcement as he is — actually more so. The questions are where does it come from and how do you create employees who are intrinsically motivated? Pink doesn’t really answer either question. I made up an old saying that answers it, “You can’t be proud of yourself, till someone has been proud of you.”
March 19th, 2010 at 12:13 am
I certainly agree on changing group/individual behavior. Could it be that intrinsic motivation is as simple as enjoying the behaviors it takes to be successful in a job? If I can be myself, do things the way I like and don’t have to adjust much, knowing my natural behavioral style won’t change much, I would think that’s a major part of intrinsic satisfaction. If I have to constantly focus on changing myself to better fit the job, I will suffer energy loss, frustration and stress trying to become somebody I am not intrinsically. Liking what I do – behaviorally – seems to me to be intrinsic.
Extrinsic motivation comes from the outside, not the inside. What is the “extra” I need to do something I am not currently doing or may not enjoy doing, possibly out of my “character” or norm. The “extra” typically is the carrot – money, power, altruism, knowledge, harmony, doctrine/religion. We each have our priorities as to which of these are important and which are not, as well as how important they may be. One of my disagreements with Pink is his (among others) determination on which of these is higher in his hierarchy. Why is Altruism higher than Harmony/aesthetics, which is in turn “higher” than the others? People who write books on what to look for in the perfect job so often base their recommendations on what would make them happy and assume it works for everyone. Some people do not care about helping others unless they meet their particular criteria for “deserving” help, and they may not change that view as they get older. Is there really anything wrong with that? Is the quest for knowledge really less “advanced” than the quest for harmony/aesthetics? These are judgment calls, and I don’t believe these writers should be passing judgment. Many problems the world faces today are based on differences in these extrinsic motivators or passions. We assume if someone else does not value what we do, they are “wrong”, instead of simply different. We base our decisions on the extrinsic motivators, so they are visible and dynamic. We need to understand this and not necessarily be so judgmental.
In the workplace, our intrinsic motivation comes from our behavioral performance – liking the work we do. The extrinsic motivation comes from the rewards of the job – money, power, knowledge, etc. If we are not receiving the rewards most valued by us, our life is not fulfilled, and we move on.