I’m On A Mission to Ban Motivation Programs – Join the Movement

I'm done with motivation.  That's right – I've given up on trying to help companies motivate their employees, channel partners or consumers.  I'm throwing in the towel.  Why you ask (I hope you ask)?

Motivation isn't something I can do for you.  Motivation isn't something anyone can do for any audience.  And if it were possible – it would be short-lived and ultimately damaging to your employer brand and your brand in general.  I cannot be responsible for programs and processes that will ultimately hurt you. 

What I will do is help you validate the behaviors you want, validate the people who help your company and your business. 

It Started With Dilbert

A while back Scott Adams (the Dilbert genius) wrote a blog post that said (I'm paraphrasing since I can't find the original post – if anyone has it please let me know in the comments) the single biggest thing people want in life is to have an impact – to know that their existence made a difference.  Everything else is just icing on the cake.

Validation is what we want.  We have to know, need to know, that being here wasn't a fluke and that our existence changes, enhances, helps, and causes something to happen.  We need to know we left a mark.

Motivation Is Sleight of Hand
Motivation, as a concept is sound – provide a reward for an outcome.  But if you think about it – there isn't anything motivational in it.  As the participant I still control the process – I decide to participate or not.  I'm not motivated – I'm just deciding on the value of the exchange.  That's not motivation – that's basic self-interested economic behavior.  So, while a motivation program might provide me a different set of variables in an equation, I'm not motivated as much as I'm just deciding to do something with a better outcome than before. I am influenced – but not motivated.

Once the program is removed, my equation changes – and I might, or might not, continue with the behavior.  Once the program is removed, the value of the behavior falls below where it was under the "incentive" and I might be less influenced by the equation and therefore may decide to do even less than before.  Kind of a "rebound" effect.  You can call it motivation but in reality it isn't.  I'm not saying these programs don't work – they do – very often and very well.  I'm just not happy with the term "motivation." 

I think we fool ourselves into thinking we're doing something for the audience when in reality we're doing something for the company.  Calling it motivation makes it a little easier to swallow than saying we're just changing the value exchange in a behavioral decision.

Motivation is Something "I" Have – Not Something You Give Me. 

Motivation is my internal desire, in many cases my irrational desire, to do something.  Either I have it – or I don't.  Adding 10 more points to an incentive program won't change that.

So what can you do to drive performance, change behavior, create engaged audiences?

Create a way to publicly and loudly, validate that your participant made a difference and that their presence with the company, group, team – was valuable and important.  That is something you can do – and something that they want.

Validating a behavior, an outcome, an approach, an effort is really what we all want.  And we will continue to do things that give us that "validation fix." 

When I validate your behavior – you will do more of it.  When I don't validate it – you should do less of it.  If not – then maybe you're internally motivated – and that's fine to.  It just may not be the behavior your company, team, or group values and wants.  In that case – find a different team.  No employee engagement program, recognition program or incentive program will influence your behavior if your internal drive is opposing what the company wants.

I'm not against programs that change the value exchange – like many incentive programs – I'm just against calling them motivation programs.  Let's call them what they are – influence programs. It is important to direct someone's behavior – especially during these times when business models change frequently, products are updated at increasing rates and company direction can be as erratic as a meth addicts heartbeat.

But – If we stop thinking we're motivating people and start thinking in terms of influencing and validating them I believe we'll end up with better program design, better outcomes and better audience participants.

And ultimately, those that don't receive validation will leave – those that do will stay.  Maybe, just maybe, we'll have a motivated audience.

What do you think?  Join the movement or squash it?  Do we need to change our approach and let people motivate themselves – but allow companies influence behavior?

Let me know in the comments.  Remember, just posting a comment validates your point of view.  That's what you want isn't it?