Thursday, September 15, 2011
Away from Money...
For the past many years I have been reading many articles how money seems to be waning as a motivator. I recently read an article as to why money does not get the required results and also why money will get important as you go up in the organisation.http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-09-09/news/30135782_1_rats-shock-bonuses/1However, I would tend to disagree with this tournament theory and the fact that money becomes important by default as nothing else is available.I have seen many seniors in whom there is a drive to influence, to change, to leave an impact, to leave a legacy. As you go higher up you are in positions where the cars, suits or houses no longer differentiate (relatively). Why do people talk about a Kamath or a Indra Nooyi. Do people discuss their houses or what they have achieved? More importantly did they do it because there was large amounts of money involved?I would hypothesise that there are inflection points for the various motivators in life...from growth to security to legacy. If the the inflection point of leaving a legacy does not occur then money does become important and stays important.This next article seems to support this point. The survey says "making progress in meaningful work" is what engages people.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/opinion/sunday/do-happier-people-work-harder.html?_r=1And therefore choices we make as we grow in the organisations will reflect a lot on how engaged and motivated we are with the work...and more importantly how engaged we are with LIFE!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for sharing this Krishnan.
ReplyDeleteI like the Growth- security – legacy graph that you talk about – it appeals to me.
Money is important, but in a certain fashion. ‘Less’ money demotivates, more money might not motivate.
Definition of less would vary across individuals and at different times for same person.
Less can be less compared to a) what I feel is right; b) what I need at a certain point of time; c)what I see my supposed peers earning, d) efforts I feel I am putting in, etc.
I find concept of ‘hierarchy’ interesting. In an organization we need hierarchy for
coordinating and directing efforts. Why then do we need to associate differential monetary value across heirarchial levels?
I don’t see a parallel of such differentiation in other institutions. Families are hierarchical in certain senses. But does that mean we ‘respect’ people differentially?. Or would it mean that father/mother of the house would get a ‘larger share of the meal’ for dinner?
Recently I read somewhere “Equality means having equal opportunities for inequality.” As humans, we all want to feel differentiated. I can be higher if someone is lower. One way of doing this is to differentiate in terms of money. So guy at the top might be differentiating himself in terms of money vis-à-vis those below because he wants to feel differentiated.
But then is ‘differentiation’ a hygiene factor or a motivator? I feel differentiation is a hygiene factor. If it’s not there it demotivates. If it is there it needn’t motivate.
Motivation comes from within. That’s where I agree with what you say about ‘Progress in meaningful work.’
Definition of meaningful is personal. As individuals what we can do is to figure out what gives meaning to us. As managers what we can do is to understand what gives meaning to each of our teammates and to see how meaningful work can be enabled for them.
-
Sourav