Pink's Assessment on Motivation... has this been done before?

Daniel Pink’s book, Drive, was discussed this week in PMO 527, and yes, Pink brings up a very interesting point about “Motivation 2.0” and “Motivation 3.0”.  Pink basically believes that organizations should utilize an operating system that focuses less on rewards and punishments (motivation 2.0) and more on fostering autonomy, mastery, and a sense of purpose in its employees (motivation 3.0).  On my PMO 527 discussion board, I expressed how torn I was with Pink’s perspective on motivation.  I still am not convinced that the military organization should move towards motivation 3.0.   I believe the majority of the people in the military posses autonomy, mastery and a sense of purpose within their profession, and that there is a place for rewards and punishments in the military.  

I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but I’m left wondering about the originality of Pink’s perspective.  Isn’t this just building on the “Motivation Theory”, which states that 

“when we motivate ourselves, or someone else, we are developing those incentives or that we believe will help move a person to a desired behavior.  Whether it is through intrinsic motivation or extrinsic motivation, most individuals are moved by their beliefs, values, personal interests, and even fear” 

http://www.money-zine.com/Career-Development/Leadership-Skill/Motivation-Theory-and-Leadership/

However an organization decides to approach motivation, be it “2.0 or 3.0”, isn’t the organization just trying to figure out how to get people to accomplish their jobs efficiently and increase productivity.  Pink was just suggesting a method he though would work best, but I’m wondering if that method has already been outlined in other literature.  For instance, Pink’s motivation 3.0 theory can be made to fit into Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, which was published in 1954, well before Pink’s book.  Actually, a fellow classmate, Kezia Edmonson mentioned how she agreed with Pink’s assessment on motivation because of how it fit into Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.  So again, has Pink done anything new here.... or is it just re-word and re-categorizing the work that has already been produced on motivation?

Regardless of how someone is motivated, as managers and leaders we need to be aware of the different theories on motivation, and we have to figure out how to employ them in our command roles.  From the class discussions on Pink’s book, Drive, I will take away the knowledge that not one person is motivated in the same manner as someone else, even if they do the same job and are the same age/sex/background.  The point is, one needs to find out what motivates their people, and build on that. 

A Frustrating "Reward" System

It is very evident that Kerr’s 1995 article, On the Folly of Rewarding A, While hoping for B, is completely correct and present in all forms in today’s civilian and military sectors.  The PMO 527 discussion boards on this topic were fascinating, and I was actually shocked at how prominent this problem is..... and what was more shocking, is how everyone’s post left a very deflating and defeated feel to them.  What is one supposed to do when organizations “reward A, while hoping for B”, how does this dynamic get fixed, or is there even a solution for it?  

While conducting further research online into this topic, I came across a table which provided further examples of how “A” is rewarded but the hope was for “B”.  It was actually the US Academy of Management who polled a number of senior executives on the prevalence of this folly in business today (http://www.strategicdevelopment.com/articles_details.php?articles_id=8). Those executives reported that it is alive and well. Instances they quoted are shown in the table below.

Hoping for . . .	While rewarding . . .
Teamwork and collaboration	The best team members
Innovative thinking and risk taking	Proven methods and not making mistakes
Development of people skills	Technical achievements and accomplishments
Employee involvement and empowerment	Tight control over operations and resources
High achievement	Another year’s effort

What I find most fascinating about this table is how organizations are hoping for innovative thinking and risk taking, while rewarding proven methods and not making mistakes.  I can’t help but laugh, as I have seen that happen time and time again in my military career.  It is always stressed by the chain of command that initiative and innovation is desired.... but the safe “sure thing” route is always taken.  Money is usually the reason for this, why fix something that isn’t broke, especially if extra costs could initially be present.  

For me, frustration is still the word (emotion) that surrounds this topic.  I believe people who belong to organizations with such messed up reward systems are left feeling frustrated, which naturally influences motivation.  It was William Bainbridge who stated that “leaders make a major error when they sustain reward systems that “pay off” for one behavior even though they hope clearly for something else” (http://schoolmatch.com/articles/SCMFEB94.htm).  Bainbridge could not be more correct, I believe supporting such reward systems is a devastating lack of leadership and it can actually be more detrimental to the workplace, then an actual “reward” system that it was originally meant to be.  

http://www.strategicdevelopment.com/articles_details.php?articles_id=8

http://schoolmatch.com/articles/SCMFEB94.htm

How to get the community to support the nurse/doctor substitution matter?

The most recent topic of discussion for PMO 527 was how “some have suggested that in primary care settings, well-trained nurses can do approximately 80% of the work normally completed by physicians (e.g., Scheffler et al., 2009). Moreover, in a recent review of the impact of doctor-nurse substitution in primary care on patient outcomes, process of care, and resource utilization, Laurant et al. (2007) found no appreciable differences “between doctors and nurses in health outcomes for patients, process of care, resource utilization or cost” (p. 2). The authors concluded that appropriately trained nurses can “produce as high quality care as primary care doctors and achieve as good health outcomes for patients” (Laurant et al., p. 2).  I commented on my discussion board of how I thought the doctor-nurse substitution concept was a great solution, and really assisted in providing primary care to rural areas in Northern Canada.  There is still an area I’d like to discuss though, and that is getting the community’s support for such a transition in health care.  

I keep wondering how to get the community and the patients support for the doctor-nurse substitution and/or supplementation topic.  It is evident that this matter elicits much debate from the PMO 527 class discussion boards as to the pros and cons of it.  Simply put, a pro could potentially be financial as nurses are normally paid less than physicians.  A con could potentially be patient comfort and safety from receiving primary care from a nurse instead of a doctor.  So with such a controversial matter, how do you implement a change in health care and get the community to support it?

One idea that came to mind was education and communication, the information has to be available to people in order for them to feel involved in a process change, or at the very least, information has to be available for them so that they don’t feel bombarded, offended and resistant to the change.  As there are many reasons why people are so resistant to change (http://npcanada.ca/portal/), and they do apply to changes in societal health care practices.  I know the Canadian Nurses Association launched a campaign in October 2011 to bring awareness to Canadian Nurse Practitioners.  This campaign highlighted how nurse practitioners can be the answer to more access to better health care, and in some areas in Canada, a supplement to doctors (http://npcanada.ca/portal/).  By actively providing information to the community on the roles of Nurse Practitioners, I believe that the community will be more welcoming to the change of having Nurse Practitioners providing more primary care within Canadian Communities.

http://npcanada.ca/portal/

http://www.schulersolutions.com/resistance_to_change.html

Mission, Vision, and Other Reasons Good Officers Retire

For the first section of the Health Care Management (PMO 527) course there was quite a bit of time focused on mission and vision statements.  I know this may seem like a very basic concept to many people, but I never really stopped and thought about the process of developing a mission and vision statement.  I have not been involved in the process before, and in military establishments, most times these statements are just provided to you.  I never knew so much time, energy, and effort went into the process. I did a search for ‘mission and vision development process’ online and it was remarkable how many websites came up.  With so much work going into creating these statements, it only makes sense to have companies/business/military organizations follow them.  When organizations fail to operate in accordance with their mission and vision statements, that is when issues arise.  These issues are insidious though, people won’t stop working, or be flat-out lazy at work because operations aren’t functioning in accordance with the mission and vision statements.  People may feel a little mis-guided, or not know how their work is contributing to the larger picture, which I believe impacts morale and ultimately productivity.  I can say that I will no longer passively read the mission and vision statements of where I work in the future.  

Tim Kane’s article “Why Our Best Officers Are Leaving” was extremely fascinating.  I learned a lot about the American Military by reading this article.  I believe it to be very true that the “military is creating a command structure that rewards conformism and ignores merit” (Kane), and as a result, some really great Officers are getting out of the forces early.  I originally thought about ‘blogging’ about the bureaucracy of the military and how the process of promotions should change, but then I started thinking of the other reasons why people get out of the military... and those reasons are very valid and worth mentioning.  

Specifically for John Nagl who Tim Kane speaks about in his article.  Nagl got out of the military after 20 years of service, and yes, there was the matter of him not being a Colonel yet and there didn’t seem to be a strong likelihood that he would make General, so Nagl retired.  Nagl is the head of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), “known in Washington as President Obama’s favorite think tank” (Kane).  Having other job opportunities is a valid reason for getting out of the military, and if a wonderful opportunity presents itself outside of the ‘uniform’, then why not take it?  Nagl’s work at CNAS regularly reaches the White House and the National Security Council, and I doubt Nagl would have had such high level exposure if he remained in uniform.  I just think it is okay for really great Officers (leaders) to retire after giving many years of service to their country.  Any service in uniform is something to be proud about, and it shouldn’t be viewed of how a few more years of service could have been squeezed out of the member.  If the issue is that the “Best Officers” are leaving, the probability that these individuals will continue to contribute to the workforce in a productive manner is very high, which in the end, still benefits America.  

Additionally, I think (again, just my opinion), that it isn’t always just the military member’s decision to retire.  Most times the military member has a family to think about, and this family has contributed to their country in a very special way - they have been supporting their active duty spouse/father/mother/child by standing by them over the years.  Don’t they get a say in when military retirement should happen?  I think military members get exhausted after many years of service, operational temp is very high and draining, deployments are long and hard, and moving takes its toll on a family.  What if the military member wanted their children to graduate with kids that they spent their entire high school careers with, or that they wanted their spouse to have the same family doctor for years to come, or if they wanted to move closer to their parents as they’re getting older and aren’t well.  There are a variety of reasons why military members (the Best Officers) get out of the military, and I don’t think it can all be weighed on the military having a command structure that rewards conformisms over merit.  

I attached a link to the website I was viewing on how to create a mission and vision statement.  Also, I attached the link which lists the mission statements for the top companies in 2011, it is actually a really good (and quick) read.  The last link is one about U.S. Army retention, I came across this when I was trying to get some more background information about U.S. military releases and retention.  It does state in this report that job satisfaction is the main reason for retention, and benefits being listed as the third reason.  This lends support to Kane’s article, if people aren’t satisfied with their job, and if they are not rewarded on merit, then they may leave the military early.  

http://www.axi.ca/tca/mar2004/associatearticle_1.shtml

http://drdianehamilton.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/top-10-company-mission-statements-in-2011/

http://mldc.whs.mil/download/documents/meetings/201001/Army_Retentioin_Brief.pdf

Leadership and Management Blog

To continue the discussion on John P. Kotter’s article “What Leaders Really Do”, I did some searches for other pieces of work that touched on the same topic.  From reading the discussions posted on sakai, it seems evident that the majority of people agree with Kotter, that management and leadership are different but complementary.   I thought Kotter’s article was extremely interesting and I agreed with almost everything he said, except for something he stated in his first paragraph.  Kotter states that “Leadership isn’t mystical and mysterious.  It has nothing to do with having “charisma” or other exotic personality traits” (p.85).  I know Kotter is discussing ‘leadership’ here and not ‘leaders’, but in any leadership course I have taken in the military, charisma was always discussed as a personality trait that strong leaders possessed.   I acknowledge the fact that Kotter ‘s point is that leadership goes beyond charisma, but I do think a leader needs a certain amount of charisma (or other exotic personality traits) in order to align people. 

The Harvard Business School Bulletin for February 2011 had a piece on “What Makes a Good Leader”, and there is an informative section on ‘Communication is Key’.   Nitin Nohria, a Harvard Business School professor states that “Communication is the real work of leadership”, and Nohria also notes that great leaders spend the bulk of their time communicating.  I know I discussed on my sakai post that I wasn’t convinced that the military embraced the difference between management and leadership.  I am convinced that the military does a very good job of developing communication skills for those people in leadership roles.   The Harvard Business School Bulletin explains that knowing your audience is essential when communicating, and it was actually John Kotter who said “Great communicators have an appreciation for positioning.  They understand the people they’re trying to reach and what they can and can’t hear. They send their message in through an open door rather than trying to push it through a wall”.  The hierarchy of the military allows for the development of communication skills.  People in leadership roles may have to brief up the chain of command one day, and convey the same message to their personnel the next day.  How a message is delivered to the different levels of the chain of command is a talent that the military develops, and aids in the improving the leadership skills of the individuals. 

I have attached the website for the Harvard Business School Bulletin, and a second website that discusses the difference between management and leadership.  I have posted a chart from the second website that outlines some of the key differences between management and leadership.

http://www.alumni.hbs.edu/bulletin/2001/february/leader.html

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/articles/manager_leader.htm