"...in a moment of youthful indiscretion, I went to law school." - Daniel Pink
I am often inspired by TED Talks. I realize there is a trend for TED bashing and I occasionally participate in such things. I also find that while I disagree with some of what TED has become, I think that the individuals who share their stories and then post them for free are often inspiring and help me re-think. One of these is Daniel Pink's "The Surprising Science of Motivation." This talk makes a case for redefining work, management, and problem solving.
I struggle with management. I am a manager and I despise behaving in managerial ways. I am not a fan of "carrots and sticks" thinking. Much of my success in my career has come as a result of pursuing interests that I would pursue regardless if there was a paycheque or dividend attached. I have been fortunate enough to be able to monetize this kind of behaviour and break out of the mould of "work" that I used to have to do.
Pink's talk reminded me of a great book I once read called "First, Break All the Rules." After I read it, I changed many of the ways I lead. What was interesting was I began to get criticized for being too nice or too soft on those I was leading. Amusingly, even though I was easy-going, work got done, work happened just as fast or slow as it would if I had behaved differently, and I was less stressed out, less contemptuous, and less managerial (with all its negative connotations). Self-serving? Perhaps. I also believe that nobody can be responsible for your happiness, only you can.
So, what is Daniel Pink's big idea? I will summarize what I think he is saying. In today's knowledge economy, extrinsic motivators (carrots and sticks) are less effective than intrinsic motivators (internal drivers like passion and engagement). We are no longer a society of assembly line workers, we are paid to use cognitive skills, and the moment cognitive challenges are introduced to a problem, the efficacy of extrinsic motivators evaporates.
So, what do we do? How do we motivate people? Make sure you have the right people doing the right jobs (figure out what they care deeply about and get them to do that), give them the tools to get the job done without distraction, and get out of their way.
Daniel Pink's ideas reminded me of David Carson's TED Talks answer to the question, "what's definition of a good job?" The answer, his favourite, "if money didn't matter, would you continue doing what you are doing? If you would, you've got a great job. If you wouldn't, then rethink what you are doing because you're going to be doing it for a long time."
Lastly, all of this connects nicely to Nick Nissley's talk at the recent TEDxCalgary. His talked focused on an idea he has termed "narrative leadership." This is the notion that great leaders tell great stories. How these stories are told and what kind of vision they inspire can determine what outcomes are more likely. His example was the term "at risk" in the context of disenfranchised youth. The story of someone "at risk" is to say that they are always on the brink of disaster. Instead, what if the story was about youth "at potential." To tell the story of someone who is "at potential" is the story of someone who might fail once or twice, but because they are have potential, it only makes sense that, in this story, they would continue to realize that potential.
Daniel Pink's Talk - http://blog.ted.com/2009/08/the_surprising.php
David Carson - http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/david_carson_on_design.html
Nick Nissley - http://www.banffcentre.ca/departments/leadership/faculty/nick_nissley.asp
No comments:
Post a Comment