Theory on Carrots and Sticks

In The Surprising Science of Motivation, Dan Pink talks passionately about his opinions of what motivates people to succeed. I love how he introduces the topic by talking about his experience in Law school and ties the theme into his presentation. Through his passionate case, he believes that society should assess the way businesses are run. Based off what motivates people, the main problem at hand is the off set of what scientists know and what businesses do. On the screen behind him, he projects a picture of a candle, a box of tacks, and some matches sitting on a table. He explains that in a certain experiment, scientists asked people to figure out a way to attach the candle to the wall. Many people, like I would probably in the situation, tried to use the matches to melt the side of the candle and stick it to the wall but failed. However, when the materials are arranged differently with the tacks loose on the table and the box empty, the solution appears much more simply. The box can hold the candle and be pinned to the wall by tacks. In his next point, Daniel introduces he idea of continent motivators that involve rewards for completing certain tasks. 'If you do this, then you get that.' Surprisingly, he revealed that these types of motivators aren't useful when solving tasks that involve creativity and out-side the box thinking. Instead, self-drive is what successful people possess in a creative situation where you have to think past the obvious option (candle picture with tacks separated from the box). When tested, the group with money offered to them took longer to complete the task than the group without an incentive. However, he did mention that rewarding for simple tasks proved to be useful. I agree that society should begin to move away from motivating with rewards because I think that once we begin rewarding people, they will only stay motivated if and when they are offered something just as good or better than past rewards. This can become a vicious cycle because motivation can only occur when the reward is increased. The most important message that I think Dan Pink is trying to send is that as society evolves, white collar careers are going to be shifting and becoming more right brained meaning that we should move away from rewarding for tasks and focus more on self-drive. He is saying that in the future, offering a sweeter carrot or sharper stick will not be an effective way to motivate people anymore. The most interesting thing that he brought up was the notion that companies are giving their employees free time to work on their own projects. This time called 'fedex day' or '20 percent time' has been the most beneficial to companies for producing new inventive products. It makes sense that when people are given the time to focus on their own interests they will be more effective employees to the company. I don’t think that this same notion would work for everything though. For me, if given a day to do whatever I wanted, I would sleep-in probably accomplish nothing. However, if students given the freedom to choose a class to take, I think the results would be positive. Kids would be choosing something that interests them and therefore would be more focused and willing to work hard. Even though many people believe self-drive to be a utopian thought, Daniel Pink ensures us that it can be accomplished and I agree. Rewards often decrease people’s creativity and people can become reliant upon them. It’s the 21^st century, we are moving out of the information age and into the conceptual age. No longer will carrots and sticks be the main motivators. Society must adapt to the changes and be open to a whole new mind.