It’s commonly understood that individuals performing an action are motivated by both internal (intrinsic) and external (extrinsic) factors. For example, students may be motivated to complete an assignment in school because…
- They are genuinely interested in the topic and want to discover more information about it (an intrinsic motivation).
- They want to receive a good grade on the assignment (an extrinsic motivation).
- A combination of the two, though not necessarily valuing each motivation equally. In a subject we’re interested in, we’re most likely to have a higher level of intrinsic motivation. In one we hate, we’re probably just going for the grade.
In the same way, people at work may be motivated because of a genuine belief in the goal of the organization they work for and their contribution (intrinsic), by wanting to receive a promotion and a raise (extrinsic), or most likely, a combination of the two.
But is being motivated by two different types of motivation really conducive to the most success? The common sense answer has always been yes – two types of motivation must be better than one. However, new research shows that our assumptions may be wrong.
An article published in the New York Times details the study that calls this concept into question. The study drew on data of over 11,000 cadets at the United States Military Academy at West Point who rated their motivations for attending the Academy, like being trained as a lead in the Army (intrinsic) or getting a better job later in life (extrinsic). Then, they followed up on them years later to see how they turned out.
What they found was surprising. The cadets who had strong intrinsic motivations ultimately did better in the military (evidenced by early promotion recommendations) than those with weaker intrinsic motivation, and were more likely to stay in the military beyond their years of mandatory service UNLESS they also had strong extrinsic motivations.
Cadets who strong intrinsic motivations AND strong extrinsic motivations performed worse on every measure than those with strong intrinsic motivations and weak extrinsic motivations. They were less likely to graduate, less outstanding as military officers, and less committed to staying in the military beyond their years of mandatory service.
The implications of this study cannot be overstated. Many tasks we complete at work likely have both intrinsic and extrinsic outcomes – if we complete a project, we get personal satisfaction (intrinsic) and we get to continue receiving a paycheck or get that raise we’ve been hoping for (extrinsic). But, that doesn’t mean we are equally motivated by the two. What this study suggests is that if our extrinsic motivations at work become as strong or stronger than our intrinsic motivations, our performance will suffer.
As employers, leaders, and managers, it may be considered common sense to cater to both types of motivations…but this may have the unintended consequence of actually driving a weaker performance from your staff by weakening the significance of their intrinsic motivations in proportion to their extrinsic motivations.
A few examples
Let’s think about how this may apply to some of our intrinsically motivated professionals – teachers – and some of our most extrinsically motivated professionals – sales.
Sales. There are few types of professional that are driven more by financial motivations than the average sales staff due to the commission structure. But, the best sales professionals are also motivated by a strong internal desire to win – they love the hunt and ultimately bagging that big prospect. The money is a nice offshoot of that, but is not what is primarily driving them to succeed.
Think about how this might apply if you’re trying to rally your sales staff. If you’re focusing on things like contests to see who can close the most sales in a month and offering a financial bonus as a reward, that’s only going to strengthen that extrinsic motivation, which actually might result in poorer performance in the long run. Instead, think about how you can focus on and develop their intrinsic desire to hunt and close that big prospect.
Teachers. On the opposite end of the spectrum we have teachers, some of the most intrinsically motivated people in the world. They are driven to do what they do by mission, not money. However, in the past several years, an increasing focus on teacher accountability may actually be detracting from their intrinsic desires to teach by strengthening the value of the extrinsic motivations. The system has become structured so that teachers are encouraged to “teach for the test”, with potential salary bonus rewards if they do that task well. Accountability is important, but if its structured in a way that brings those extrinsic rewards up to the same perceived value as the intrinsic motivations that got them into teaching in the first place, we have got a serious problem on our hands.
Rethink everything
This study calls into question so many of our common practices in terms of motivating employees. It’s time to revisit the way we have everything structured – does your system focus your employees’ attention to the meaning and impact of their work, or does it focus on the financial (or otherwise external) rewards? This is a serious question to tackle. The performance of your employees, and the success of your organization, depends on it.
Like this article?
Recent Comments