insights

7/6/2006

Motivating People

Filed under: Leadership Excellence — fcg @ 4:35 am

In the myriad of management theories regarding motivating people in their work there appears one approach that holds a combination of truths. In 1971 Dr. Clare Graves delivered an insightful (but obscure) paper titled “How Should Who Lead Whom to Do What?” (Read). It suggests that motivation theory may not have found the answer because we have been asking the wrong question.

The paper was before its time as it takes an integral systems view - looking at the psychology of the leader (I), the values of the led (WE), the policies in place (ITs) and the work to be done (IT) - so as to develop a whole approach to any management situation. His proposition: If any one of the four are out of alignment at their different levels, effectiveness is threatened.

Graves, in integrating many fields of personal and industrial psychology, concisely summarizes his conclusions on the styles needed for the management of the most talented:

“In this system the means to the end or organizational goals are restructured to fit the individual characteristics of the organizational member, rather than attempts to restructure that person to fit the organizational needs. The manager’s role is to rework the organization so that its goals are achieved utilizing the people as they are, not as someone wishes them to be or perceives they should be (1981:8)”.

Graves acknowledges here a subtle but profound premise - that people are already motivated. The perceived problem is that we would prefer they were motivated to do the same things we are - and in the same way. The paper goes on to ask the very different question about motivation theory. Rather than how to adapt people so as to motivate them, it asks how should we adapt our leadership to enable people who are already motivated to contribute at their best. It asks a question of us about our true motivation - not theirs.

The essence of his understanding has two truths. The first is that leadership is the art of leading people as they are. The second is to recognize when we are leading as we are. Which of the two approaches is easier: adapting our leadership style to the many ways people find meaning in their existence or requiring people to adapt to what we find meaningful? Not only is the second extremely difficult, in large and diverse organizations, it may also be unconscionable.

In Graves’ own words:

“This proposition is well represented in many managerial situations today. In many firms that I have observed I have seen training programs wherein the policy was to change the beliefs and ways of behaving of the manager. These firms developed managerial training programs designed to modify the beliefs of the manager as to how work should be conducted in order to bring them more in line with the organization’s preexisting methods and beliefs. (Seilers, 1968, p.134) These programs do not try to fit managerial development to the beliefs and ways of behaving that are those of the managing person. They attempt instead to get the managerial person to change his or her beliefs. When organizations foster this kind of incongruency they cast the managing person into a severe value crisis – a crisis which more often than not, reverberates to the detriment of effective performance in his managerial situation.”

In the emerging field of values management there is an enticingly real risk that while ostensibly respecting peoples’ values we will instead seek ways to manage those values. Seeking to manage people by managing their core values will have its own problems. Only those blinded by cleverness will walk into this trap. As any manager knows, people have a great resilience to being how they are.

To assist the unsuspecting, Graves has pointed us to a truth that helps us discern our own leadership motivations and the appropriateness of our leadership style - before we inquire as to the motivation of others.

For the leaders of Generation Y, and also for the new Generation Y Leaders - this simple truth is becoming increasingly apparent, as both seek to manage, and be managed, as they are.

Learn more:

Gen Y Talks - (Link)
Talking Down to Gen Y - (Link)

3 Comments

  1. Will
    Terrific and Timely (As Always)… read the piece (while diverting to the html prompts) and it strikes me in at least two dimensions….

    First it is a boon to the evolution of coaching… a dilemma faced when a player is playing well and the quest arises of how to stand in to help them play weller in concert with the wider team, the opposition and the scoreboard… your insight makes it simple … see each element as being in a well-state and craft the help to being weller based on a fused platform of those existing states… easy peasy.

    Second strike is a fresher view of the organisation, as a living breather (sorry to Clare and his cybernetics platform) or call it an organism in some stage of it growth cycle … herding cells on to an unwanted and unliked path puts the algebra of shepherding into disarray … perhaps this comment needs more thought … so until that happens … have a great day pursued in the way you like, where you want it and in company that’s in sync with the stuff to be done.

    Regard Pad

    Comment by pad bennett — 15/6/2006 @ 9:46 am

  2. Hi Will,

    A great grab. I felt a real truth in this view of the territory and work of leadership, not
    because I can site many texts supporting his theories, but because I can relate to this at a
    personal level. I like where this is going in terms of relationships to Gen Y, as this kind of
    leadership seems immanently easier to practice in a small organisation such as ours (at least
    this is what we try to do!). With the growth in the number of people starting their own small
    businesses (as appears to be the way of many Gen Y people) the opportunites to work in this
    way are ever increasing.

    Comment by James Miller — 15/6/2006 @ 9:50 am

  3. Hi Will

    Once again, your information and reflection is absolutely on the mark! I’ve just finished reading “Sophie’s World” - after it seemed to land on my desk 4 times I finally took the hint! This is an amazing story of the development of philosophy over the last 5,000 years or so. Once I immersed myself into that timeframe a lot of stuff that seems to be relevant, like up-to-the-minute deadlines and the need for control, sort of drifted away. I bring this up because this book, like your writing here, seeks to have us asking questions of ourselves, rather than imposing our often closed views and values upon others. And this is particularly so for leaders. To lead others by being the change we seek, by allowing others to share our journeys and vice versa, and to always ask “Why?” (funnily enough that was my first word that I spoke as a child, rather than the usual “No”), is in my humble opinion the only way to lead.

    Thak you so much, Will.

    Blessings
    Wendy Campbell

    Comment by Wendy Campbell — 29/6/2006 @ 6:25 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress