Commentary: On Creativity and Motivation

By Daniela Petosa
Creativity + Social Change, University of Connecticut
Media Reviewed:

TED: Dan Pink on the Surprising Science of Motivation
Career analyst Dan Pink examines the puzzle of motivation, starting with a fact that social scientists know but most managers don't: Traditional rewards aren't always as effective as we think. Listen for illuminating stories -- and maybe, a way forward.

Dan strongly believes in incentive design or rewarding employees for their performance. He explains extrinsic motivation and that it works -- depending on the situation. He references a concept known as the Candle Problem. He describes how motivation is being free to be creative and flexible. It is natural as humans to feel motivated with an incentive. Dan makes a compelling case on why we need to change our ways. He states that some rewards work well for some and not others. Some rewards work well for simple tasks because the mind is concentrated and has a narrow focus while difficult and more complex tasks narrow our minds and restrict possibility. He mentions that the more difficult tasks should not be over looked by keeping our minds restricted and to be open in our peripherals.

Dan believes there is a mismatch between what science knows and what business does. He believes the science of motivation: “As long as the task involved only mechanical skill, bonuses worked as they would be expected: the higher the pay, the better the performance, but once the task called for even rudimentary cognitive skill, a larger reward led to poorer performance.” He claims that this isn’t a feeling or a philosophy, but a fact. He divides the brain and categorizes people such as programmers and accountants as left-brain thinkers, while the right-brain thinkers as more creative. Organizations today outsource left-brain tasks overseas because it is easy to automate these activities, while the right-brain individuals have their own candle problem they are facing. Organizations are based on assumptions that are outdated. The solution is not to do more of the wrong things. “We find that financial incentives ... can result in a negative impact on overall performance.” Management is an invention that doesn’t last. To utilize management is to engage in self direction which works the best. To strengthen a business and solve candle problems, enhance creativity to drive individuals to do things that matter for their own sake. Dan concludes that IF-THEN rewards can destroy creativity. Organizations in the 21st century need to encourage individuals to be themselves. Perhaps the world would be a better place. ...

Overall, the presentation by Dan is correct. He makes a strong, science-based case for rethinking motivation. He does get the big picture right. He says that people would prefer activities where they can pursue three things:

• Autonomy: People want to have control over their work.
• Mastery: People want to get better at what they do.
• Purpose: People want to be part of something that is bigger than they are.

Top management sets the basic compensation and benefits structure. If that isn't perceived as fair and consistent, then natural, intrinsic motivation won't kick in. I personally applied a reward program at work and added a creative touch to it. I had employees compete amongst each other for prizes and as a result the staff was happier and generated more sales. Organizations need to implement a design where it will both benefit the company, as well as employees. If the employees are happy, the business will succeed.