Introduction

Last week, we covered the flaws behind the ‘carrot and stick’ approach.

This week, we’re moving past that. Because this week we’re covering what real motivation is.

This motivation isn’t something that someone can hand you on a silver platter, this is your own drive.

I also now have gotten my hands on Greene’s Mastery, and the cool thing is that it is essentially a perfect continuation of the second part of this book.

Let’s dive in 🤿

Main Learnings of Part Two

Pink explains that the best motivation you can have is to be a ‘Type I.’

Unlike the ‘Type X,’ who are extrinsically motivated by things like status, money, and power, Type I people are driven by a drive deep within them.

They are devoted to becoming better and better at something that truly matters, and it connects that quest for excellence to a larger purpose.

This Type I behaviour, being self-directed, depends on three nutrients:

1. Autonomy

2. Mastery

3. Purpose

Let’s cover each of them.

“The Three Elements”

1 Autonomy

Pink makes an excellent point in this section, pointing out that ‘management’ does not stem from nature.

It is a man-made technology, something humans invented.

We aren’t made to be passive, inert, and compliant.

We are made to be active, and engaged.

“Have you ever seen a six-month-old or a one-year-old who's not curious and self-directed?

That’s how we are out of the box.

If, at age fourteen or forty-three, we’re passive and inert, that’s not because it’s our nature.

It’s because something flipped our default setting.”

I couldn’t have said this better myself.

Having said this, Pink now plants a thought to really think about.

Is management a force that is responding to our natural state of passive inertia?

Or is it a force that is producing this state?

Some certain companies seem to be aware of this, and are utilising it to their advantage.

Take Google, and their ‘20% time’ for example.

It grants employees the autonomy to allocate approximately one-fifth of their workweek to pursue projects that intrigue them.

This freedom allows employees to explore new ideas, experiment with different technologies, and innovate outside the confines of their regular duties.

Often cited as a driver of innovation within the company, it is this 20% time that brought about things like:

• Gmail, by Paul Buchheit

• Google News, by Krishna Bharat

• Google AdSense

• (The development of) Google Maps

• (Key components of) Chrome Browser

It’s clear, but often ignored that autonomous motivation promotes greater conceptual understanding, as Pink points out.

It doesn’t end there; better grades, enhanced persistence at school and sporting activities, higher productivity, less burnout, and greater levels of psychological well-being.

Researchers found that autonomy doesn’t only benefit the employees—greater job satisfaction—but also the organisations themselves.

During a study of 320 businesses, the businesses that offered autonomy grew at four times the rate of the control-oriented firms and had one-third the turnover.

So how do you provide autonomy? Pink says there are four essentials:

→ Task

Giving people autonomy over what task they tackle is the first block of autonomy.

Perhaps something as simple as Google’s 20% time.

Mike Cannon-Brookes, CEO of Atlassian, said that “People are far more efficient about 20% time than regular work time.”

William McKnight, president of 3M at the time, believed in this too: “Hire good people, and leave them alone.”

Have you ever used a Post-it note? Well, it’s thanks to McKnight’s push for autonomy.

→ Time

Among other things, the reason lawyers are often so miserable is because of a lack of time autonomy, says Pink. “They have little ‘decision latitude.’”

“The deprivation starts early.

A 2007 study of two American law schools found that over the three-year period in school, students’ overall well-being plummeted—in large their need for autonomy was thwarted.

But students who had greater autonomy over their course selection, their assignments, and their relations with professors showed far less steep declines and actually posted better grades and bar exam scores.”

Who would have thought that someone controlling your time rigorously could have such an effect?

Pink then makes a really good point. Lawyers must keep meticulous track of their time, often in six-minute increments.

And so, “if the rewards come from time, then time is what firms will get.”

Inevitably, their focus deviates from the output of their work—solving a client’s problem—to its input—piling up as many hours as possible.

Employees in a ROWE (Results Only Work Environment) report better relationships with friends and family, more company loyalty, and more focus and energy.

Their productivity has also increased by 35%, and the voluntary turnover is 320 basis points lower.

“Employees say they don’t know whether they work fewer hours—they’ve stopped counting.”

→ Technique

Imagine what it’s like working at a customer service line, Pink illustrates.

People don’t call to ask you how your day has been, they call to complain about something that isn’t even your fault—and it needs to be solved now.

Sitting for hours in your cramped cubicle, you tap a few buttons and pull up a script.

Your task then is to follow the script, often word for word, to get the caller off the line as soon as possible.

It’s no surprise, then, that the average annual turnover rate at these call centres is 35%, and in some an excess of 100%!

In that case, no one working there today will be there in a year from now.

He does then illustrate the opposite, potentially ideal world.

At Zappos, an online shoe retailer, new hires go through a week of training.

At the end of the seven days, employees are offered $2,000 if Zappos isn’t for them and they want to leave.

Tony Hseih, the founder, uses an ‘if-then’ reward not to motivate people to perform better, but to feed out those who aren’t fit for a ‘Motivation 3.0-style’ workplace.

The people who remain receive decent pay, and just autonomy over their technique, rather than being monitored 24/7.

Pink says the result of this is a minimal turnover rate, and a customer service that is ranked as one of the best in the US—ahead of Cadillac, BMW, and Apple!

→ Team

Similar to being the third child of a family, Pink compares the lack of choice and say you’d have to that of a new job.

Well, although that is why many are drawn to entrepreneurship, there are some very respectable examples of organisations that implement autonomy over team.

Take Whole Foods, for example. The people in charge don’t do the hiring.

After a job candidate has worked for a thirty-day trial period, the employees themselves in the team vote on whether to hire that person full-time.

“Ample research has shown that people working in self-organized teams are more satisfied than those working in inherited teams.”

“The Art of Autonomy”

As Pink here emphasises, consider people Like Pablo Picasso, Vincent Van Gogh, and Johann Sebastian Bach.

Nobody told them you must paint exactly this. You must do it in precisely this way. You should be done at this time. You’ve got to work with these people.

“The very idea is ludicrous.

And you know what? It’s ludicrous for you, too.”

Pink highlights that we all need autonomy just as deeply as a painter, and yet that encouraging autonomy doesn’t mean discouraging accountability.

He explains that his Motivation 3.0 “presumes that people want to be accountable—and that making sure they have control over their task, their time, their technique, and their team is a pathway to that destination.”

2 Mastery

Mastery, something clearly so important Robert Greene wrote an entire book on it.

Purpose, autonomy, and purpose are all interlinked. Pursuing mastery, as Greene highlights, is your Life’s Task.

Having just spoken about autonomy, the very opposite of it is control.

And, well, control leads to compliance. It is autonomy leads to engagement.

Remember that, because only engagement can produce mastery.

Pursuing mastery is about entering a childlike state of play, only on a higher level.

In the midst of play, Pink explains, people can enjoy what psychologist Csikszentmihalyi called ‘autotelic experiences.’

Coming from the Greek auto (self) and telos (goal or purpose), in an autotelic experience the goal is self-fulfilling; the activity is its own reward.

Similar to play, the pursuit of mastery is ultimately about achieving the flow state, and doing so consistently.

Flow is essential to mastery, and during it the relationship between the challenge of the task and the abilities of the person is perfect.

“In flow, people lived so deeply in the moment, and felt so utterly in control, that their sense of time, place, and even self melted away.”

Mastery, Pink explains, abides by three “somewhat peculiar” laws:

→ Mastery Is a Mindset

Combining Carol Dweck’s insights with his own, Pink expresses that the pursuit of mastery is all in our head, and that what people believe shapes what people achieve.

To attain mastery, you must adopt a growth mindset, recognising that deep and powerful inclinations towards something are what will get you far.

He also importantly mentions the difference between learning and performance goals.

For example, getting an A in French class is a performance goal, whereas learning to be able to speak French is a learning goal.

Now here’s the crucial part: Both goals can fuel achievement, but only one leads to mastery.

Dweck’s studies showed that giving children a performance goal was effective for straightforward problems, but inhibited their ability to apply the concepts to new situations.

“With a learning goal, students don’t have to feel that they’re already good at something in order to hang in and keep trying.

After all, their goal is to learn, not to prove they’re smart.”

“In a sense,” Pink says, “[people with a fixed mindset] want to look like masters without expending the effort to attain mastery.”

→ Mastery Is a Pain

The best indicator of success, a study found, wasn’t intellect, strength, leadership, or attractiveness.

It was perseverance, and a passion for long-term goals.

And as Pink says, if it was lined with daisies and spanned with a rainbow, then more people would take the trip.

“It’s gruelling, to be sure. But that’s not the problem; that’s the solution.”

→ Mastery Is an Asymptote

Simply put, an asymptote is a straight line that a curve approaches but never quite reaches.

And this, as Pink explains, is the nature of mastery: Mastery is an asymptote.

You can strive for it, you can work for it, and you can reach for it.

You just can never be perfect.

But why reach for something you can never fully attain?

Why not reach for it?

The joy is in the pursuit more than the realisation.

After all, life is a journey, not a destination.

This is precisely why it is the perfect end goal.

You hear stories of depressed millionaires or celebrities all the time.

And it’s because they treated their efforts as a means to an end.

“In the end, mastery attracts precisely because mastery eludes.”

3 Purpose

The final section of Part Two of Pink’s book discusses something more than just goals. Something much larger, and that is purpose.

Pink hints that both autonomy and mastery are essential, but that for proper balance you also need purpose.

Although autonomous people who pursue mastery work at very high levels, those who do so in the service of some greater objective achieve on an even higher level."

“The most deeply motivated people—not to mention those who are most productive and satisfied—hitch their desires to a cause larger than themselves.”

And there are studies showcasing this.

Pink elucidated that giving employees control over how the organisation gives back to the community (e.g. giving to charity) can do more to improve their overall satisfaction than one more ‘if-then’ financial incentive.

Why?

Naturally, we are purpose maximisers, not profit maximisers.

“People who are very high in extrinsic goals for wealth are more likely to attain that wealth, but they’re still unhappy.”

That is how Richard Ryan concluded his findings after following up with some students years after they had left Uni.

He had asked them about their life goals just before they left.

He had the goal of finding the difference in happiness and fulfilment between those who answered with ‘profit goals,’ like attaining wealth or fame, versus those who had ‘purpose goals,’ such as to learn, to grow, and to improve other people’s lives.

Result?

The profit goals had no impact on well-being and actually contributed to ill-being.

So, if it isn’t obvious enough already, the conclusion is simple:

“The science shows that the secret to high performance isn’t our biological drive or our reward-and-punishment drive, but our third drive—our deep-seated desire to direct our own lives, to extend and expand our abilities, and to live a life of purpose.”

And so, my friend, that is all for today.

I wish that you go out and find your drive, devote your efforts to becoming the best version of yourself, and do so in service of a purpose larger than yourself.

B-Mega,

Fabian