From Motivation to Engagement
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

From Motivation to Engagement



A presentation arguing that engagement is a more productive way to work with knowledge workers.

A presentation arguing that engagement is a more productive way to work with knowledge workers.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 17 16 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

From Motivation to Engagement From Motivation to Engagement Presentation Transcript

  • BEYOND MOTIVATION TO ENGAGEMENT: The Challenge of Knowledge Work
    ALMA Conference, Houston, 2001
    James W. Marcum, Ph.D.
  • Lab Management Purpose
    Problem solving
    And a good return on investment
  • Lab Management: Challenges
    Researcher or Administrator?
    Administrative support to handle
    Publicity, safety, legalities, maintenance…?
    … or, how many hats do you wear?
    V. P. White, Handbook of Research Laboratory Management (ISI Press, 1988)
  • Resources
    Accomplishments NOT due primarily to
    Building and equipment
    Financial support
    Quality processes
    But rather to the dedication, effort, commitment and engagement of the people on the “front lines”
  • Personnel: Challenge and Opportunity
    Traditional management
    Leadership . . . (dysfunctional?)
    The new management
    Knowledge workers are different
    Quit treating people as dummies
    Motivation = manipulation
    Rewards kill interest
    Engagement is worth a try
  • Knowledge Workers: Characteristics
    Specialized: effective in specialty
    Acquire and apply theoretical and analytical knowledge
    Learning-based (formal education) and habit of lifelong learning
    Require a social context.
    P. Drucker, Managing in a Time of Great Change. (Dutton, 1995), pp. 226-243.
  • Knowledge Workers = Intellectual Capital
    … create, share, search out, and useknowledge in their daily routines
    T. Davenport & L. Prusak, Working Knowledge, (Harvard Business, 1998), p. 108
    they “own” the means of production of the digital economy
    D. Tapscott, Digital Economy (McGraw-Hill, 1996), p. 67.
  • Knowledge Workers: HumanCapital in the Digital Economy
    Expect value for value given
    Require full disclosure(cynical: have experienced corporate disloyalty/layoffs)
    Seek meaning in work; and opportunity for advancement
    Require extensive learning
    Opportunity to network, work in teams
    Smith and Kelly, “Human Capital in the Digital Economy,” in Hesselbein, ed., The Organization of the Future, (Jossey-Bass, 1997), pp. 201-205.
  • Knowledge Creation
    Not best measured by number of patents and scientific formulae
    But rather by social trust, care, Ba, technology-enhanced communication, communities of practice, and interorganizational collaboration
    I. Nonaka and T. Nishigushi, Knowledge Emergence (Oxford, 2001)
  • Net Generation: Knowledge Workers of the Future
    working = learning = playing = working ...
    require flexible, custom environments which they can influence and shape (consensus, not arbitrary command)
    simultaneously an authority (some domains) and a student (in others)
    cannot be “supervised” (in traditional sense)
    require: fully networked connectivity
    D. Tapscott, Growing Up Digital (McGraw-Hill, 1997).
  • The Motivation ‘Complex’
    A paradigm: Ubiquitous assumptions underlie social attitudes about learning, child-raising, and employment
    Enormous industry of “motivators”
    Recognition and Awards
    Bonuses, trips
  • The Problem with Motivation
    Idea of “motivating people” should be banished from the language of management
    Amounts to manipulation and control
    Demeaning and dysfunctional
  • The Problem with Motivation
    Idea of “motivating” people should be banished from the language
    Amounts to manipulation and control
    Demeaning and dysfunctional
  • People … dummies?
    Motivation image: Carrot and Stick ... what lies in between?
    . . . motivation, as practiced, treats people like ....
    H. Levinson, “Asinine Ideas toward Motivation,” Harvard Business Review, (January 1973).
  • Motivation: Evolving Models
    Behaviorism (person as machine)
    Cognition (person as decision-maker)
    Purpose (person as creator of meaning)
    Maehr and Meyer, “Understanding Motivation and Schooling,” Educational Psychology Review (1997).
  • Motivation I: Behaviorism
    Assumptions of biological core dominated early 20th Century ideas
    Stressed appetites, instincts, frustrations
    Biological / mechanical assumptions
    Watson; Hull’s “drives;” Skinner’s S-R theory
    Freudianism (drives vs. civilization) as well
    Cofer and Appley, Motivation: Theory and Research (Wiley, 1964).
  • Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Motivation
    Shadow of B. F. Skinner(positive reinforcement)
    Rewards seen as universally beneficial
    Yet we’ve known for 25 years that (external) rewards are detrimental to ...
    Intrinsic motivation: underlies cyclical patterns of behavior where people seek out and conquer challenges that are optimal for their capacities
    The Hidden Costs of Reward, ed. Lepper & Greene (L. Erlbaum, 1978)
  • Motivation II: Cognition Theory
    Cognition Theory “OVERTHREW” Behaviorism by mid-20th Century
    New focus on Mind, Perception
    And the Self (self-management, self determination, self efficacy, etc...)
    Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, 3 vols.
    Ed. Sorrentino & Higgins (Guilford, 1986-96);
    B. Weiner, Human Motivation (Sage, 1992);
    R. Sperry, in Science of the Mind (1995), 35-49.
  • Motivation II to III: Approaches
    Motivation Research Models
    Individual differences
    Situational variations
    Interaction (individual X situation)
    Maehr and Meyer, “Understanding Motivation…”
    From “Scientific Management” to Human Relations
    Needs hierarchy (Maslow)
    Hygiene factors (Herzberg)
    Theory Y (McGregor)
  • Motivation III: Creating Purpose and Meaning
    ... draws on the best from the past
    Motivation theory encompasses cognition, consciousness, self, emotions, affiliation, and achievement
    Weiner, in Handbook of Motiv. & Cognition, I, 281-292.
    For example: Quality(Deming),Empowerment(Kanter), Learning Organization(Senge), and Knowledge Managementstill use “motivation”
  • Motivation III Toolbox
    Since hierarchy and management power have eroded, the new tools are:
    Mission(importance of the work)
    Agenda Control(influence over own lives)
    Share in Value Creation(entrepreneurship)
    Learning(both individual and group)
    Reputation(essential for professionals)
    R. M. Kanter “New Managerial Work,” Harvard Business Review, 1989.
  • Continued Reliance on“Motivation” by Business
    Recognition and rewards are vital to a quality evaluation program
    T. Peters, Thriving on Chaos (Knopf, 1988), pp. 494-502.
    Outstanding companies practice: security, high wages, cross-training, “ownership”
    J. Pfeffer, Competitive Advantage ... People (HBS, 1994).
    Must manage motivation effectively via equity, availability, visibility, and rewards
    S. Kerr, Ultimate Rewards (Harvard Business, 1997).
  • Motivation: Weaknesses of the Theory
    Goal: Cause action(where there was none)
    Vroom, Work and Motivation, p. 8.
    Incidental(not continuous)
    “Paternalistic:” energize & direct behavior
    Cofer & Appleby, pp. 12-13.
    Linear, deterministic(i.e., behavioral)
    Over-reliant on rewards
  • Motivation III: Current Practice
    Retains heavy reliance on REWARDS, incentives and participation
    R. M. Steers, et al., Motivation and Leadership at Work. 6th Ed. (McGraw-Hill, 1996);
    T. Quick, The Manager’s Motivation Desk Book (Wiley, 1985);
    Crandall & Wallace, Work and Rewards in the Virtual Workplace (AMACOM, 1998), pp. 148-151.
  • The Problem with Rewards
    Tangible and expected rewardsundermine free-choice intrinsic motivation(findings of 128 studies)
    Only exceptions:
    Disagreeable tasks
    Verbal feedback (recognition of competence) if unexpected and “non-controlling”…
    Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, “A Meta-analytic Review,”
  • Rewards
    Kill Interest
  • Rewards
    Rewards signal that the task itself is not worth doing
  • Problem with Rewards: 2
    Rewards require surveillance, competition, and evaluation, all of which diminish intrinsic motivation (kill interest)
    Rewards also rupture relationships, disrupt teams, punish everyone else, and discourage risk-taking
    A. Kohn, Punished by Rewards (H-Mifflin, 1993).
    R. M. Steers, et al., Leadership and Motivation. (McGraw-Hill, 1986), pp. 496-526.
  • ENGAGEMENT:Dictionary Definition
    to attract, hold by influence or power
    to entangle, entrap, engross
    to induce to participate, to join in
    to provide occupation for
    to commit to appear for an event
    to interlock, place in gear (mechanical)
    to enter into conflict (military)
    temporal (more than 1, less than permanent)
    Oxford English Dictionary, (1989), V, 247-249.
  • Engagement: Definitions from theLiterature of Motivation
    assumes activity
    is absorbing, engrossing
    implies enjoyment … and interest
    pertains to subject’s field of competence
    requires direct participation
    involves acquiring more & better knowledge
    demands significant self-determination
    involves challenging tasks
    is characterized by persistence
  • Engagement: Definitions from Learning Theory
    Self-determination(Deci & Ryan, Bandura)
    Creative task engagement(Conti)
    Competence(Connell and Wellborn)
    Context, personalization, choice(Cordova)
    Interest, enjoyment, flow(Hidi, Csikszentmihalyi)
    Self-reaction(Bandura and Cervone)
    Self-regulated learning(Corno & Mandinach)
    NOTE: focus is on learning goals, not achievement goals.
  • The Engagement Model:Contributions
    Learning Theory
    Activity-Engagement Systems Theory
    Action identification (Wegner/Vallacher)
    Action engagement (Higgins/Trope)
    Action theory (Kuhl/Atkinson)
    Other ideas: communication, information management, and purposeful work
  • Activity Systems Theory
    Psychological study of behavior is atomistic, focusing on pieces, elements
    Much human activity, such as language and relationships and work processes, is broader, holistic, more purposeful
    Clark and Crossland, Action Systems (1985)
    NOTE: Activity is assumed in engagement; it is a goal of motivation.
  • Engagement Theory:Other Contributions, #1:
    Relationships and process of communication engaging the interests of another in the absence of coercion
    Involves dialogue and introspection
    Requires openness -- not closed and complete situation
    M. McMaster, Intelligence Advantage (1996).
  • Engagement Theory:Contributions, #2
    By choosing to engage/not we enjoy a tool and measure for informationmanagement; a scale for handling information overload:
    passive (seeing, hearing)
    presenting or teaching
    using in practice
    T. Davenport, Information Ecology (Oxford, 1997).
  • Engagement Theory:Contributions, #3
    Engagement in empowering work gives purpose to human life, structures time, and provides a valuable tool for positive self-esteem and mental health
    Meaningless work does not …
    Mee and Sumsion, “The Motivating Power of Occupation,” British Journal Occupational Therapy (March 2001): 121-128.
  • Organizational Engagement:Contributions, #4
    Interaction between
    Social Systems(people)
    Technical Systems(work processes)
    Communication Systems(decision making and organization change)
    Cherin, “Organizational Engagement…” Administration in Social Work (2000
    Also see Nonaka and Nishiguchi, Knowledge Emergence (Oxford, 2001)
  • Not necessarily
    Feelings of wholeness, integration, suspension of judgement, clear perception, sense of awe, feelings of power and beauty, self-confident, creative … without awareness of space and time- (Maslow)
    Intense concentration, lack of self-consciousness, effortlessness, oblivious of distraction
    Autotelic: process is the reward - (Csikszentmihalyi)
    Kytle, “Constructing an Engaged Life,” (2000)
    Attention, mindfulness (consider options)
    Ellen Langer, Mindfulness (1989)
    Ba(Japanese) shared physical / mental space
    Nonaka & Ishigushi, Knowledge Emergence (2001)
    Care: Fostered by: trust, active empathy, real help, lenient judgement, and courage
    Destroyed by: bureaucracy, competition, and punishment
    G. von Krogh, “Care in Knowledge Management” California Management Review (Spring ‘98)
  • ENGAGEMENT: The Theory
    Engagement = Learning(Interest + Competence + Challenge + “Change”)
    + Involvement(Participation + “Hands on”+ Commitment)
    In a Social Context
    Increased Knowledge & Effectiveness
    ENGAGEMENT! =Learning...
    Marcum,“Out with Motivation, In with Engagement,” National Productivity Review(1999).
  • Engagement vs. Motivation
    Goal: learning and greater knowledge
    Assumes equality among participants
    Assumes activity, and motivation
    Is ongoing, temporal
    Seeks meaning/care
    Goal: initiate action
    Protagonist assumes responsibility
    Seeks control, influence
    Biological core
    Atomistic, linear, deterministic
  • From Motivation to Engagement
    However sophisticated, motivation endeavors seek to control and manipulate and are therefore unsuitable for managing knowledge workers.
    An “engagement” mindset offers a more useful model for mutually beneficial working relationships with knowledge workers.
  • In Brief:
    Motivation = control and manipulation
    Engagement = learning and involvement in a social context
  • Rewards
    Rewards signal that the task itself is not worth doing
  • Implementing Engagement: Suggested Guidelines
    Think partnerships, not “employees”
    Scan for interests and competencies, not past records
    Focus on achievements, not processes
    Provide for continuous learning
    Test with challenges and opportunities
    Negotiate projects, avoid assignments
  • Engagement Guidelines(continued):
    Provide networked, participative digital environment
    Dismantle boundaries; review and restructure processes and procedures
    Foster teamwork and collaboration
    Measure and improve morale
    Seek to build an environment (Ba) that is both fun and purposeful
  • Management Models: Engagement Vs. Motivation
    Leader as coach and facilitator
    Scrambling to keep up with the pack
    Running a tight ship
    Leader in control, giving directions
  • Review
    Motivation = control and manipulation (Baaad!)
    Engagement = learning and involvement (GOOD!)
  • Rewards
    Rewards signal that the task itself is not worth doing
  • Engagement
    Engagement occurs when an individual or group undertake tasks related to their interests and competence, learn about it continuously, participate freely with (equal) associates, immerse themselves deeply, and continue the task with persistence and commitment because of the value they attribute to the work.
    Discovery (definition):
    Uncovering, disclosing, or bringing something to light for the first time
  • Discovery (learning) Strategies
    Allow for initiative and self-direction
    Allow choice in methods utilized
    Utilize new technologies
    Provide for work in teams
    Provide “room” for perseverance and adaptation as competence is acquired
    Marcum, “From Information Center to Discovery System,” Journal of Academic Librarianship (2001).
  • Managing Discovery
    An engaged staff offers the greatest potential for making discoveries and accomplishing important goals cost-effectively.
  • Good Luck …Jim Marcum