Motivating Workers
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
That may be true of some jobs I guess, but certainly not all. I have a few banker friends who hate their jobs but are motivated by huge sums of cash.
But aren't they already motivated by the cash? The job doesn't add that, exactly. And at least in IT, it has been shown that money itself is a poor motivator too. IT isn't a career field motivated by money.
-
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
You can't force motivation. It's a lackluster effort at best. You can force faux-motivation,
I don't know what that means. I know that a lot of companies motivate staff via money and threat of termination.
Neither of which have been shown to be good motivators.
Yes, they kind of motivate, but mostly they motivate people to look elsewhere. They can motivate you for an hour or a day. But they are unlikely to make you reliably motivated.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Haven't they? I haven't seen any studies either way. I know its still a popular way of motivating staff. I haven't heard of any photocopier resellers scrapping their commission system because their sales reps are so inspired by photocopiers, or banks scrapping their bonus scheme because their workers are so inspired by credit default swaps that bonuses are no longer required.
Is it? I'm aware that a lot of people think they are motivating people that way but not aware that it is actually motivating anyone. Salespeople become salespeople (in my experience) because they are motivated by money and like doing sales. The money is already a motivation before getting there. The job isn't motivating them, it's just not demotivating them - allowing them to motivate themselves.
The things you are talking about - removing compensation, I would say would be demotivational. Paying below the value of the work. People who are already motivated by money will be more motivated by more money, I agree. But people who are not already motivated won't be more motivated by more money.
If they were, people would act very differently than they do as a whole
-
@coliver said:
There are a lot of different motivation theories, many of which have decades of evidence to back them up.
A.J. is referring to what I think is the Self-Determination theory, which basically says that once an employee meets three intrinsic needs, competence, relatedness, and independence (I think been a long time since my management theory classes) that employee will be working at their optimal productivity.
That seems to make sense. Paying nothing means that people have to find their money (or food, or housing) elsewhere. But pay them enough to be happy and paying them more won't motivate them more. I know that studies were done in this and were required reading for my management graduate work and they supported that at least in IT, money beyond market value really did nothing and would actually cause problems as people began to see their work as tied to money rather than being its own reward.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@coliver said:
Neither of which have been shown to be good motivators.
Haven't they? I haven't seen any studies either way. I know its still a popular way of motivating staff. I haven't heard of any photocopier resellers scrapping their commission system because their sales reps are so inspired by photocopiers, or banks scrapping their bonus scheme because their workers are so inspired by credit default swaps that bonuses are no longer required.
I'm speaking as someone who isn't inspired by my job, btw. I mean I don't mind coming to work, but I do it for the money. I still believe I do a good job.
There has been studies on this since the 50's. Money and threats aren't good motivators, it has been show in every major motivation study done. Money work up till a point, but after that point offering more money has diminishing returns. Threats almost never work, people produce less when threatened with termination then if they were given any other kind of incentive.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
People who are already motivated by money will be more motivated by more money, I agree. But people who are not already motivated won't be more motivated by more money.
Yes. I agree with this. People are different. Assuming I'm understanding the difference between motivation and inspiration, I'd say I'm motivated at work but not inspired. That doesn't make me any less of a worker than @thanksajdotcom, it makes me different. I think there's a danger that people can assume that everyone is just like them and anyone different is wrong.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
People who are already motivated by money will be more motivated by more money, I agree. But people who are not already motivated won't be more motivated by more money.
Yes. I agree with this. People are different. Assuming I'm understanding the difference between motivation and inspiration, I'd say I'm motivated at work but not inspired. That doesn't make me any less of a worker than @thanksajdotcom, it makes me different. I think there's a danger that people can assume that everyone is just like them and anyone different is wrong.
The idea is though, if you were more "inspired", as is described in a motivation theory, you would be able to produce more. Now for IT what does that additional production look like? I don't know.
No one is saying you are a bad worker. I am in the same boat you are, I am not inspired by my job, it is a good job but I am really only here because they pay me to be here and take care of their infrastructure.
Personally one of my most basic motivations is challenge, if you put a situation in front of me that is challenging and "unique" I will work harder and more efficiently at accomplishing that task.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
People who are already motivated by money will be more motivated by more money, I agree. But people who are not already motivated won't be more motivated by more money.
Yes. I agree with this. People are different. Assuming I'm understanding the difference between motivation and inspiration, I'd say I'm motivated at work but not inspired. That doesn't make me any less of a worker than @thanksajdotcom, it makes me different. I think there's a danger that people can assume that everyone is just like them and anyone different is wrong.
Someone who is motivated, at least in my understanding of the terminology, might be great if inspired but completely useless, if not. I like to think of myself as being highly motivated in general. I am going to do a lot of work one way or another but need to be inspired if you want me to do that work "for you." The most motivated employee might still do no work.
-
Dunno. All I know is I've got two hours left at work, it's a beautiful, warm sunny day outside, and I've got the day off tomorrow. I'm seriously lacking motivation AND inspiration to do anyhthing right now.
-
Think of it this way:
Staples inspires me. First off, I don't know why but it does. Anyways, because I'm inspired, I push myself to be better, sell more, provide better service, and overall be a more valuable employee to the company. This means that Staples gets more value from me because I push myself than if I wasn't inspired. In all fairness, it's not Staples that inspires me but my desire to help the customers I've developed relationships with. Also, I push myself because I take pride in that department and want to make it a name in the community to be reckoned with.
-
I'm not doubting that. My point is that just because you are like that doesn't mean everyone is.
-
If your already motivated sure I get it, but you need to stay motivated. In order to do that you need to treat all your staff with kindness and not favoritism. Lift there spirits and you lift them up to go and do more for you and themselves.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'm not doubting that. My point is that just because you are like that doesn't mean everyone is.
Everyone has something they're passionate about. No one (as a rule) has zero ambitions or passions. The key for a company is triggering an employee to tap into their own passions.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
No one (as a rule) has zero ambitions or passions.
My point isn't binary. It's not inspiration versus motivation. You can have both, to varying degrees. I'm motivated by money but I'm not only motivated by money. I don't have much inspiration or passion for SMB IT, but I don't have zero inspiration. People are more complex than a lot of these books make out.
-
@thanksajdotcom Disagree. I absolutely adore what I do, I've been obsessed with it since I wrote my first line of code. I liked my job a lot when I took it, still in college. But my motivation definitely skyrocketed when after the first year, and just about every year since, my boss pulled me into his office and said "We'd like to give you a raise. A gigantic one."
Money is a valid motivator at the very least for many people. I've seen it happen personally and in others a variety of times in a variety of workplaces. It's romantic to think that it isn't, and that there's enough flexibility, purpose, and freedom in every job out there to create meaning and "do something you love", but it's also naive. A lot of jobs simply don't have that maneuverability.
-
@creayt said:
@thanksajdotcom Disagree. I absolutely adore what I do, I've been obsessed with it since I wrote my first line of code. I liked my job a lot when I took it, still in college. But my motivation definitely skyrocketed when after the first year, and just about every year since, my boss pulled me into his office and said "We'd like to give you a raise. A gigantic one."
Money is a valid motivator at the very least for many people. I've seen it happen personally and in others a variety of times in a variety of workplaces. It's romantic to think that it doesn't, and that there's enough flexibility, purpose, and freedom in every job out there to create meaning and "do something you love", but it's also naive. A lot of jobs simply don't have that maneuverability.
See, I disagree. I would say it wasn't the money that was the motivator, but rather what the money represented, which was appreciation of the value of your work. Money in and of itself doesn't mean much. However, people like raises because it means their work is being appreciated. Like @scottalanmiller said, sales people are motivated by the money itself, but I'd bet you were more concerned that they appreciated your skills and dedication than the money itself.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
I'd bet you were more concerned that they appreciated your skills and dedication than the money itself.
If my boss called me in to his office said "I can give you a raise or I can give you some appreciation, which would you prefer?", I'm pretty sure what my answer would be.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
I'd bet you were more concerned that they appreciated your skills and dedication than the money itself.
If my boss called me in to his office said "I can give you a raise or I can give you some appreciation, which would you prefer?", I'm pretty sure what my answer would be.
Businesses demonstrate appreciation by two primary means: promotions and raises. You could also add incentives to that, such as paid trips/vacations, etc. However, businesses demonstrate they appreciate you via those two means. If your boss calls you in and says he appreciates what you do, but he's firing you, that's not real appreciation. That's fake.
-
Maybe you can't motivate them but, you sure can demotivate them. And companies do that all the time to workers.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Maybe you can't motivate them but, you sure can demotivate them. And companies do that all the time to workers.
Totally agree with that!
