Why Intrinsic Motivation at Work Sometimes Barely Matters

Source: Pixabay/Pexels

In the best-selling book Drive, author Daniel Pink attempts to simplify motivation science by suggesting the superiority of intrinsic over extrinsic motives to instill optimal work performance. When motivated intrinsically, individuals set goals and engage in behavior for reasons related to personal improvement such as satisfying intellectual curiosity, increasing self-esteem, and feeling gratified by their accomplishments. Alternatively, behavior can be motivated by external forces, including extrinsic rewards such as pay for performance, work incentives, or avoidance of threats from a demanding boss. At deeper levels, materialistic gains can be linked to recognition from others, improved social status, or the ego boost you get when you score a reservation at a sold-out hotel. However, contrary to many popularized views of motivation, one size does not fit all (Cerasoli et al., 2014).

Motivation consistently changes

Simple and singular explanations of motivation are wrong because of the changing nature of motives within people during a task and the differences between people on similar tasks. Instead, motivation is better understood as a spectrum of intensity based on how deeply we value task completion. Additionally, multi-disciplinary research suggests that the perception of exercising choice and free will in the pursuit of our goals is more important than the source of motivation (Deci et al., 2017). When individuals are mandated to complete certain tasks, have the perception of being manipulated or controlled at work, or believe they cannot focus their talent without a full sense of willingness, motivation may suffer. Ideally, passion and purpose at work are helpful, however, if a person identifies with target activities and desires financial incentives, the anticipation of reward can provide substantial motivation and drive.

Motivation research is biased

Complicating the intrinsic/extrinsic motivation debate is the sad reality that most motivation research is demographically biased. The research is flawed because most of it is based on W.E.I.R.D populations. This acronym refers to the fact that the majority of motivational science studies are conducted with people who are westernized (W), educated (E), industrialized (I), rich (R), and from democratic (D) societies (Heinrich et al., 2010). In psychology and education, the majority of the studies in motivation science have used female university freshmen who get extra course credit for research participation. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think or feel like an 18-year-old college student! Thus, relying on inferences from traditional studies may be a highly biased approach to understanding motives because the inferences discount the views of individuals who identify with diverse cultures.

Consider the incentive context

Surprisingly, incentives can jumpstart performance and are highly beneficial for certain jobs. In the seminal meta-analysis conducted by Cerasoli and colleagues (2014), work motivation at school, work, and physical domains were investigated using 212,468 participants. Although intrinsic motivation was generally helpful for work performance, when a task was focused on the quantity of outcomes, rewards and incentives propelled higher performance. Incentives were also beneficial when the rewards were secondary to a task and not a direct focus of the individual. Especially noteworthy, the researchers found that when tasks are simple and uninteresting the impact of rewards improved performance more so than the idealistic motives of passion and purpose. Now think about it…many jobs are routine and production-focused like working in a factory, restaurant, or in retail. Can you really have enthusiasm when a job is dull, boring, and tedious? Probably not because you are there for the money. In reality, all jobs are not created equal and exclusive of privileged, high-paying careers, most people work in jobs that lack opportunities for intrinsic motivation.

Customize leadership strategies

As a leader, the ideal motivating approach is to understand employee need satisfaction. Universally, humans have an innate desire to feel they can exercise choice and free will in the pursuit of desired outcomes. Autonomy is thwarted when individuals approach work edicts based on the fear of coercion and punishment or when being mandated to reach certain outcomes decided upon by others (Ryan & Deci, 2020). As such, it is incumbent upon a leader to create a culture of inclusion by allowing individuals to express their needs, what methods they believe are best to reach goals, and by providing a sense of choice in work activities whenever possible. Individuals respond positively when they have options compared to an edict to get things done in a specific way at a specific time. Ultimately, the leader should realize that it doesn’t matter if passion, purpose, or reward are the primary performance motivators, as long as the individual can customize their work approach based on their quest for need satisfaction.

Instead of generalizing and assuming you know which type of motivation will stimulate performance, the savvy leader should be open to a diverse set of leadership approaches. Remember, conventional wisdom assumes some individuals are only marginally motivated by salary, but again, broad generalizations are often incorrect and the impact of monetary rewards should be examined on an individual basis (Lui et al., 2019). Salary may be exceptionally motivating when perceptions of unfairness or inequity exist, and removing an injustice is often evaluated as satisfying and inspirational. When autonomy is thwarted individuals may embrace financial incentives as a means to accelerate their motivation and job performance, despite lacking the romantic and starry-eyed notion that intrinsic motivation is the only cure for the disengaged worker.