It
is interesting how much psychology and neuroscience affect the idea of
leadership, an area often thought more of as an art than a science. It also
seems almost counter-intuitive that carrot-and-stick incentives do not work in
the workplace, at least not by themselves. Both “Drive,” by Dan Pink, and “Social
Intelligence and the Biology of Leadership,” by Dan Goleman, reach this
conclusion, though from different angles. Goleman approaches the issue from a social standpoint, with
neurological data supporting his arguments. He stresses the importance of a
leader’s “social intelligence,” how they interact with those they lead and the
effect their leadership has. The leader’s actions have a direct influence on
not only how subordinates perceive them, but on how effective they are at working
and on their self-worth within the organization. David Rock, in his article “Managing
with the Brain in Mind,” expounds on this viewpoint and even breaks down
successful management strategies into the acronym SCARF: status, certainty, autonomy,
relatedness, and fairness. If a leader promotes, protects, and propagates these
ideals among subordinates, the organization works more effectively and
individual members feel far more valued and fulfilled.
Most
striking, though, are Pink’s conclusions in “Drive.” He cites a series of studies
regarding carrot-and-stick incentives; the higher quality/quantity work, the
higher the monetary reward. While one might think that a high reward yielded
higher quality/quantity, instead high rewards led to substandard work, where
there was little difference between work produced given moderate and meager
rewards. He further points out that, looking to websites like Wikipedia, people
are often willing to pour hours of time into their work for free if they feel
as though they have purpose. So it is not the monetary reward that drives
people, but that sense of purpose and accomplishment.
No comments:
Post a Comment