In the following video, Dan Pink, author of Drive, examines and explains the strange (negative) correlation between monetary compensation and innovative thinking.
Dan Pink makes the point that the more creative and innovative a task, the less likely a monetary or “extrinsic motivator” will cause a positive effect. When you tie compensation to performance “it dulls thinking and blocks creativity. A larger reward led to poorer performance”
For innovative, right-brain, creative, conceptual work what positively affects motivation is “intrinsic motivators” such as Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose. The employee is better motivated when the work interests them and they have self-direction.
What creative or unique rewards has your company experimented with? We’d love to hear your feedback, leave a comment below.
I still don’t quite get it — why do larger rewards cause people to do so much worse? A sense that no matter what they do they’ll be rewarded?