Site menu:

Twitter Updates

    Get the latest posts
    by email

    Enter your email:

    Site search

    Categories

    Tags

    Blogs I Like

    September 2010
    M T W T F S S
    « Aug    
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    27282930  

    Beyond Carrot and Stick: Cognitive Surplus

    Jim Hancock shared an interesting article from Wired magazine called “Cognitive Surplus: The Great Spare-Time Revolution.”

    First, I like the description of intrinsic motivation:

    We have a biological drive. We eat when we’re hungry, drink when we’re thirsty, have sex to satisfy our carnal urges. We also have a second drive—we respond to rewards and punishments in our environment. But what we’ve forgotten—and what the science shows—is that we also have a third drive. We do things because they’re interesting, because they’re engaging, because they’re the right things to do, because they contribute to the world. The problem is that, especially in our organizations, we stop at that second drive. We think the only reason people do productive things is to snag a carrot or avoid a stick. But that’s just not true. Our third drive—our intrinsic motivation—can be even more powerful.

    Second, I like how these guys articulate what teachers often call the “self-fulfilling prophecy”:

    Pink: Often these outside motivators can give us less of what we want and more of what we don’t want. Think about that study of Israeli day care centers, which we both write about. When day care centers fined parents for being late to pick up their kids, the result was that more parents ended up coming late. People no longer felt a social obligation to behave well.

    Shirky: If you assume bad faith from the average participant, you’ll probably get it. In social media, the design principle that has worked remarkably well is to treat good faith as the normal case and to regard defections from that as essentially a special case to be solved.

    Pink: Same goes with organizations. We don’t realize how much our unexamined assumptions take us to radically different places. If I’m running an organization and my starting premise about human beings is that people are fundamentally passive and inert, that they won’t do a damn thing unless I threaten them with a stick or entice them with a carrot, that takes me down one road. But I think that’s the wrong premise, the wrong theory of human nature.

    I agree wholeheartedly.

    Write a comment