• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
From Motivation to Engagement

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

http://www.slideshare.net 16
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 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