It’s not always easy to know how to motivate people at work. Our six golden rules are here to help.
We’d all like to think that the people we work with are motivated to go that extra mile, to provide excellent service, to launch that new product brilliantly and to ace those stretch goals. It’s not, of course, as simple as that.
Motivation — the thing that energises us to strive and achieve — can be messily human and tricky, influenced by ability, skill and being in the right environment as much as by personal disposition. Being able to motivate people to do what we need them to do is a key leadership skill, for sure, but it’s also one of those things that can feel a bit, well, elusive.
That may explain why there’s such a long history of research into how we can motivate ourselves and others. Theories abound and provide an invaluable insight into what motivation is and the factors that affect it.
But what does that mean on the ground? As leaders, how can we be sure that we’re doing everything we can to create the conditions where people feel motivated to do and be their best?
Here are six golden rules we can use a guide.
It’s hard being a leader. There’s so much to do; it’s hardly surprising that we feel pulled in so many different directions and torn between so many competing priorities. There’s always a problem to solve, a tricky conversation to be had, that monthly report to deliver. And now we’re being asked to find time to think about motivation too?
However, taking a step back to reflect on what motivation is and to assess how our people think and feel about their work is an investment well worth making. We may have the nicest or most highly skilled people in our industry, but if they’re not engaged and we can’t motivate them, they won’t be firing on all cylinders.
The rewards of a motivated team are manifold. Everything seems easier when people are positive and enthusiastic about their work. If we can create an environment where we can capitalise on people’s desire to do a good job, everyone benefits. Here are just some reasons why motivation matters:
We all know what it feels like to be fully engaged and focused, at the peak of our powers and productivity. Psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi calls this “flow”, a state of optimal experience in which “people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience is so enjoyable that people will continue to do it even at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it”.
If we can bottle a bit of that, it’s got to be good for us, our people and our organisations.
There are two main types of motivation: extrinsic and intrinsic.
Extrinsic motivation is based on using external factors to encourage people to do what we want them to do. These factors might be positive, such as financial rewards and bonuses, or negative, such as sanctions for poor performance. That’s why this type of motivation is often known as the “carrot and stick”.
Intrinsic motivation is internal. It’s about our own personal drivers to do a great job, overcome challenges or build good relationships. Intrinsically motivated people tend to get satisfaction and enjoyment from what they do.
One of the most important things to realise about motivation is that it’s personal: what motivates one person will not necessarily motivate others. Some will be motivated by more extrinsic factors such as pay and status; others will be motivated by more intrinsic factors such as challenging and interesting work. Our job is to find out what will work for whom – and to act accordingly.
Daniel Pink, author of Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, suggests that people fall into two main categories: Type I and Type X.
Type I employees are motivated by intrinsic factors, while Type X are more motivated by external factors. Most people will not be exclusively one type or the other and be a mix of both. But, for Type X, the main motivator is external rewards and “any deeper satisfaction is welcome, but secondary”. Conversely, for Type I, the main motivator is “the freedom, challenge, and purpose of the undertaking itself; any other gains are welcome, but mostly as a bonus”.
Pink also has some interesting things to say about Type X and Type I behaviour that is a useful guide to understanding the two types:
Type X behaviour:
Type I behaviour:
While the benefits of intrinsic motivation are clear, it doesn’t mean that there is no place for extrinsic motivators. Pink believes they can work well for more mechanical or routine tasks, or if deployed after the event as a reward rather than a motivator (for example, giving someone an unexpected bonus for a job well done). And, as we’ve seen, they’ll be more highly prized by some people than others.
The trouble is that much of the work we do these days is neither mechanical nor routine. Research has even shown that too much of a focus on extrinsic rewards can even be demotivating. The overjustification effect suggests that rewards like big bonuses can misfire by making us less intrinsically motivated to do a good job.
That’s why we need to think carefully about the mix of extrinsic and intrinsic motivators we might deploy, when and for whom. Bear in mind, too, that most contemporary thinking sees intrinsic motivation as more in tune with today’s more complex and uncertain world of work. For Pink, for example, high performance comes from “our deep-seated desire to direct our own lives, to extend and expand our abilities and to live a life of purpose”.
We all bring our own assumptions and biases to work, whether we’re conscious of them or not. Our leadership style – and, therefore, how we might approach motivation - will inevitably be influenced by what we believe about the people we work with.
We might, for example, think that people are naturally lazy and disinclined to work hard unless we keep a close eye on them. Or we might believe that people want to do a good job and benefit from having more freedom and taking more responsibility.
These two extremes underpin a theory of leadership and motivation developed by social psychologist Douglas McGregor in the 1960s. His Theory X (authoritarian) and Theory Y (participative) leaders have radically different views about the people they lead.
If we believe that team members dislike their work, have little intrinsic motivation and low ambition, then we’re more likely to be authoritarian (Theory X), closely supervising work, even micromanaging to make sure it gets done properly. Theory X leaders tend to take a pessimistic view of people and believe they need carrot and stick rewards and punishments if they are to complete their work.
On the other hand, if we believe that team members take pride in their work and see it as a challenge, then we’re more likely to be participative (Theory Y), trusting people to take ownership of their work and do it effectively by themselves. Theory Y leaders view their people more optimistically, work with them more collaboratively and believe that they can (and should) solve problems, learn and grow at work.
Although, unsurprisingly, Theory Y is widely considered to be a more positive and enabling approach, we’re likely to use a mix of both. We may also naturally tend towards one more than the other. Like all leadership styles, much will depend on the context in which we work and the situation we find ourselves in.
But the extremes of the theory also remind us that our beliefs about our team members’ attitudes and motivations will affect the way we behave towards them. We need to be on our guard and challenge any assumptions we may have. Until we explore with the people concerned what truly motivates them, we’ll only ever have one side of the story.
Needs-based theories of motivation remind us that people have a variety of needs they bring to work with them, whether that’s the need to work in a safe environment or the need for stretch and challenge.
Psychologist Frederick Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene (two-factor) theory distinguishes between:
needs that, if left unmet, lead to dissatisfaction at work, and
needs that, if met with positive motivators, lead to satisfaction.
Crucially, dissatisfaction is not the opposite of satisfaction. Motivators (things such as recognition, opportunities for learning and the right level of challenge) will be much less likely to have the desired effect if Herzberg’s dissatisfaction factors — hygiene factors — are getting in the way.
It stands to reason, then, that a pre-requisite for motivating people is getting those hygiene factors under control. These include:
Real (or perceived) unfairness around pay and conditions
Unsafe working environments (physical or emotional)
Lack of job security
Lack of basic resources
Overbearing supervision
Unclear or unreasonable policies and procedures
Poor interpersonal relationships
Early career leaders may feel that they have little direct control over factors that may be decided above their pay grade, but we all need to have an eye to what Pink calls “baseline rewards”. If we have a hygiene factor problem that’s not within our gift to solve ourselves, then we need to manage up, making our own leaders aware of what’s getting in the way. And what we can solve ourselves, we should solve ourselves.
Then we can move on to the positive motivating factors that will really make a difference.
One of the joys and challenges of leading a team is that each team member is different, bringing different strengths, perspectives and attitudes. And each will be motivated by different things. Some might be more Type X, always hankering after a pay rise or new job title to spur them on. Others might be motivated by working collaboratively and forging strong personal relationships, or want to be stretched by new and interesting work. The context we work in will also need to be taken into account.
Some positive motivators are more universal. Everyone will benefit from safe workplaces where we look to the wellbeing of our people, encourage productive relationships and communicate often and well. Organisational and team cultures and climates matter.
Beyond that, we need to find out what drives our people as individuals. Some people will be highly self-motivated; others might need more support or encouragement. It’s always an idea to talk regularly to team members about what motivates them, being aware that this might change as they develop and grow.
Once we have a handle on these motivator factors, we can tailor our approach accordingly, using the range of tools, models and strategies available to us, as outlined above and in the What is motivation? Nutshell.
For example, if we have a team member who is strongly Type X, we need to consider how extrinsic rewards might be part of our motivation approach.
Or we might use McClelland’s Human Motivation Theory to identify needs around achievement, affiliation or power. For example, more affiliative colleagues will respond well to opportunities for collaboration and might appreciate more support when things are uncertain.
Or we might plot where team members sit on Alderfer's ERG scale of needs. Who is focused more on building relationships and who on growth? Is anyone in danger of “frustration-regression”, where we slip down the scale because our higher-level needs are not being met? Can we offer that person a new opportunity to meet those needs?
Because motivation requires us to use our judgement, to observe, communicate and persuade, it also depends on a whole range of more general leadership skills often associated with the transformational style of leadership.
The three factors that make up Pink’s Motivation 3.0 model are also relevant here. His model is based on a simple equation:
autonomy + mastery + purpose = motivation
Thinking carefully about these three elements gives us some useful tips for putting motivation into practice.
With these in mind, here are some ways in which we can help create the right conditions for motivation to take hold.
As leaders, it’s easy to default to trying to control or micromanage — more Theory X than Theory Y. However, unless we’re working with very inexperienced people or operating in a crisis situation, too much control can be stifling and demotivating. Instead, we should work on letting go that control and build instead on people’s capacity for self-direction, Pink’s autonomy.
Pink believes that we encourage motivation when people have good levels of autonomy and agency over what he calls the four Ts:
He suggests that we conduct an “autonomy audit”, asking people how much autonomy they feel they have when it comes to the four Ts. An audit will not only give us a sense of how our people are feeling; it will also encourage everyone to come up with their own ideas for how to boost autonomy levels.
For example, we may not be able to adopt a version of Google’s 20% time, but we can involve people in goal setting, take care about how tasks are allocated and be more open-minded about how they are completed.
We all know how dispiriting it can feel to be micromanaged. Transformational leadership is all about inspiring loyalty and trust in our people and preparing them to step up and lead too. Trusting others by letting go and giving them some space to do things their way is a much better — and more motivating — long-term strategy.
Needs-based theories of motivation show us that people are driven by the need to grow. Providing people opportunities to learn, develop and use their skills in new ways is often a key motivator. This is Pink’s mastery factor.
For Pink, mastery is a mindset. If we can encourage our people to adopt a Carol Dweck growth mindset, we can help them to meet those higher-order needs, even when the work is challenging. Remember Dan Ariely’s conclusion that, often, the harder a task is, the more satisfying we’ll find it.
For example, using delegation wisely and well can open up a wealth of learning opportunities. If we think carefully about matching tasks to people with an eye to their development and support them (if they need it) along the way, that can only boost Type I motivating behaviours. Even giving well-judged, forward-facing feedback can help people to develop.
Have a clear vision, communicate a real sense of purpose and embed that vision and purpose into team and individual goals and tasks. Like Jordan Peterson, who believes motivation is primarily a matter of having a compelling purpose for our work and bringing others along with us, Pink’s focus on purpose provides the context for his autonomy and mastery. People are motivated when they feel they are contributing to a wider purpose, especially when that purpose aligns with their own goals.
In the words of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, “Purpose provides activation energy for living.”
We also need to role-model positive behaviours and positivity. The way we approach our role, and the mindset we adopt, have an important impact on how others view their work too. If we’re highly motivated about what we do, others will be inspired too.
When we communicate regularly, openly and honestly with team members, we make them feel valued, involved and more likely to trust us. Let people know that we value their input, and make it clear that we want them to communicate with us. Provide opportunities such as regular one-to-ones and team meetings to give people the chance to speak up and share.
Keep people up to date and be as open and honest as possible. If you can’t be, say so and explain why. Involve others in decision-making wherever possible and explain clearly the decision-making process where it’s not been possible to involve everyone.
Team morale is important and we should use every opportunity to encourage collaboration and relationship building. But treating team members as individuals and showing them that we care about what motivates them and how we can help with their personal development is equally powerful.
Showing people that their efforts and achievements have been recognised and are appreciated is crucial. Even a simple “thank you” or “well done” can boost motivation, and remember that timely and specific feedback is as important for recognising and building on success as it is for course correction.
Recognition rituals that show our appreciation more publicly are also worth consideration.
Having an Employee of the Month might not strike the right chord in every organisation, but simple things such as opening team meetings with everyone identifying one thing they’re proud of that week is likely to be less controversial. We should also use every opportunity to let people outside our teams know about individual and team success.
It's sometimes easy for us to get lost in the detail, so showing progress can also be motivating. If we’re working on a long-term project or task, have staging points along the way and mark milestones when they’re met.
We might also consider a range of extrinsic rewards after the event to reward what’s gone before. A social night out might work with some teams, although we need to be aware that these might not work for people with caring responsibilities or be less attractive for more introverted colleagues. Giving people an extra day’s holiday or the chance to leave work early are good alternatives. We are likely to need a range of options to meet the different needs of different people.
Leadership is about getting things done through other people and, to do that effectively, we need to motivate them to do those things to the best of their abilities. As we’ve seen, that’s neither easy nor straightforward and depends on a whole range of factors that constantly change and shift. That’s why it requires us to understand those factors and to keep them under review.
The good news is that the ability to motivate positively is within every leader’s grasp. But we need to take some clear steps to create the right conditions for people to thrive and to tap into the drivers that motivate individual team members. It takes time and effort, but, if we really want people to go that extra mile, it really will be time and effort well spent.
Identify two benefits of a motivated team.
Describe three things that may be considered as workplace hygiene factors.
Explain the three elements that make up Daniel Pink’s Motivation 3.0 model.
Consider conducting an autonomy audit with your team. How would you explain why this is important? How would you use what you might learn?