Watch the video here >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y
In a captivating talk, Dan Pink, author and career analyst, recounts a personal story about his time in law school in the late 1980s—a venture he humorously labels as a "youthful indiscretion." Despite his formal legal training, Pink admits he never practiced law, but this background becomes the foundation for his lawyerly case against traditional business practices and outdated motivational strategies.
The Candle Problem and the Power of Incentives
Pink introduces the audience to the "candle problem," an experiment created by Karl Duncker in 1945. Participants are given a candle, thumbtacks, and matches and asked to attach the candle to a wall without letting the wax drip onto the table. Most people initially struggle, attempting to thumbtack the candle to the wall or melt it onto the wall with the matches. The solution lies in overcoming functional fixedness: using the box that held the tacks as a platform for the candle.
The key takeaway from this problem becomes even more intriguing when Pink discusses a variation of the experiment conducted by Sam Glucksberg. Participants were divided into two groups—one group was timed to establish norms, and the other was offered monetary rewards for quick solutions. Surprisingly, the incentivized group took longer to solve the problem by an average of three and a half minutes. Instead of enhancing performance, the rewards dulled thinking and blocked creativity, highlighting a fundamental flaw in the way incentives are often used in business.
Incentives and Their Impact on Performance
The implications of Glucksberg's findings are far-reaching. Pink explains that for tasks requiring mechanical skills, monetary rewards work as expected. However, when even basic cognitive skills are involved, higher rewards often lead to poorer performance. This phenomenon was further supported by studies conducted by renowned economists like Dan Ariely and institutions such as MIT and the London School of Economics.
Ariely's study with MIT students demonstrated that while rewards improved performance for tasks involving only mechanical skills, they hindered performance for tasks requiring cognitive skills. This pattern held true even in a cross-cultural context, as similar results were observed in India, where the value of the rewards was more significant. Similarly, the London School of Economics reviewed 51 studies on pay-for-performance plans and found that financial incentives often had a negative impact on overall performance.
Rethinking Business Motivation
Pink argues that there's a disconnect between what science knows about motivation and what businesses practice. Our traditional business operating systems, largely based on extrinsic motivators like bonuses and commissions (carrots and sticks), are ill-suited for the complex, creative tasks that dominate 21st-century work environments. These old models may have worked well for routine, rule-based tasks but fail to foster the creativity and innovation required in modern business settings.
A New Approach: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose
To bridge this gap, Pink advocates for a new approach to motivation built on intrinsic factors: autonomy, mastery, and purpose.
Autonomy: The urge to direct our own lives. Pink highlights examples from companies like Atlassian, which allows engineers to work on any project for a day (FedEx Days), and Google, which lets employees spend 20% of their time on personal projects. These practices have led to significant innovations and improvements.
Mastery: The desire to get better at something that matters. Encouraging employees to develop their skills and pursue excellence can lead to higher engagement and job satisfaction.
Purpose: The yearning to do what we do in the service of something larger than ourselves. Aligning work with a broader mission can enhance motivation and performance.
Real-World Examples and the Future of Work
Pink points to the success of companies that embrace autonomy, such as Google, where products like Gmail and Google News were developed during the 20% time. He also cites the Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) model, where employees have complete freedom over their schedules as long as they get their work done, leading to increased productivity and satisfaction.
The case of Wikipedia versus Encarta exemplifies the triumph of intrinsic motivation over extrinsic rewards. Wikipedia, driven by volunteers motivated by autonomy and purpose, outperformed Encarta, which relied on traditional management and financial incentives.
Conclusion: Bridging the Gap Between Science and Business
Dan Pink's insights challenge us to rethink how we motivate people in the workplace. The evidence is clear: 20th-century rewards can destroy creativity and hinder performance in complex tasks. Embracing intrinsic motivators—autonomy, mastery, and purpose—can lead to higher performance, better engagement, and more meaningful work.
By adopting these principles, businesses can not only solve the "candle problems" they face but also create environments where people thrive and innovate, ultimately changing the world for the better.
コメント