This article is on motivation…from a psychological standpoint…taking it from scouts to adults to leaders. I would like some feedback from you and some examples that you may wish to share. All of these current and future writings about the secret tools and techniques of leadership, when completed, will be put into an e-book version and developed into a workshop.

How To Motivate Others

If you ever come across a big outdoor scouting event like a winter camp, you will want to stand back. Scouts are busy setting up tents, digging latrines, chopping wood, checking food inventories. All these things are happening at the same time. Somehow, you tell yourself, it’s not a madhouse. Somehow, motivation is not a big problem in the scouts. These kids are not holding back!

Actually, there are some motivational issues in the scouts, and we’ll discuss those in a bit. But for the most part, scouts don’t suffer from the same kinds of performance motivation issues that adults do.

And that’s easy to understand. They’ve got all kinds of gimmicks to get them excited. Badges, competitions, handshakes, songs, spooky stories. Plus, they’re kids, for pete’s sake. You’re having so much fun, what’s the point in holding back?

The net result of all this fun and excitement is team cohesion and motivation. Which is a very good thing. A team that can be united around a purpose and that can perform at its highest level is a thing of beauty.

That kind of team positively hums.

The trouble with motivation Of course, things work differently in the working world.

Grown-ups are suspicious of banners and slogans. They don’t go in for orations and cheerleading. They don’t like to be asked to do foolish things. Dig a latrine, or do anything humble or disgusting? Let someone else do those jobs!

We see some scout-style exhortation here and there in the workplace. We see banners strung from tree to tree at company picnics. We see corporate teams work up a sweat when they compete publicly against one another, as in a three-legged race.

If you go on one of those corporate rock-climbing team-building trips, people who don’t say boo to each other at the office are indeed helping one another scramble up a cliff face. That’s great. But it’s make-believe. It’s not the real world. Get those rock-climbers back to the office reality and the old grumpiness, and the old “Have we been introduced?” attitude creeps back into place. Maybe not the day after climbing

El Capitan, but soon enough.

“Motivation” has gotten a bad name because of some of these rah-rah gimmicks. The feeling many is that it excites people for an hour, but then the motivation fades away. They say this kind of “motivating the troops” only works for some kinds of personalities, while others find it repellent and childish.

And this is a big problem for people who hope to lead: Getting people to do what you tell them to. Succeed at motivating people, and you are a big success as a leader. Fail, and no one will bother to classify you one way or the other. You will just be another guy who didn’t have what it takes to lead.

Friends, it’s time we stood back and rethought what motivation is. And pondered what those Boy Scouts pounding and digging in the clearing have to say to us.

Can you really motivate others? No. You can’t. That’s because motivation comes from inside, not out. Think about it. Have you ever received a “to do” (or “honey do”) list from your spouse? Or perhaps wrote one for yourself? Do you reliably do the things on the list? Of course you do. Why? Is it because you’re afraid of your spouse? (It’s a possibility!)

No, not really. You do the things on the list because, once completed, the physical act of crossing it off the list feels good inside. And that’s where motivation comes from; the accomplishment of outcomes.

Note something about the chores on that list:

· Rake the yard.

· Paint the banister.

· Open a checking account.

Everything on that list is discreet, doable, and short-term in nature. Therein lies the key to success. High-performing teams almost always work on short-term, continuously high-priority goals and objectives. The size and duration of the task keeps team members motivated.

You don’t have to have pom-poms hanging in your office or do handsprings down the corridor to keep people on the ball. You just need to keep people focused on the successful completion of these short-term outcomes.

Motivational levers Jane, a member of your research team was assigned a task to complete – to compile a list of national foundations with an interest in Spanish-speaking seniors — and given two weeks do it by. Nevertheless, two weeks later, there is no list.

You’re in charge. What do you do with Jane? It’s an epic problem. Figure Jane out and get her working and you are a master motivator. Goof it up, and you are just another frustrated manager. And everyone is looking at you, wondering how you’re going to do.

Even Jane is looking at you, right now, in your office. She wants to know, too. But you can see from the look in her eye that she suspects you’re from that new planet they found, out beyond Pluto, spinning around like a snowball in the dark. And she’s not going to make your job easier by dashing off that list of foundations. If you zig, chances are that she’ll zag. She’ll have excuses. (”The Internet was closed that week.”) She’ll make the whole thing seem like your fault. (”I read everything but you didn’t give me a pencil to take notes with.”)

Dear God, what’s she going to say?

Managers go to business school to prep for these emergencies. There they are taught that running things means flipping levers. Want to cut costs? Simply flip the belt-tightening lever. Need to speed a project up? Cue the drum-beater at the back of the galley to quicken the pace. Need resources? Requisition them, then lie down for the long winter nap.

It’s all levers. It’s a stimulus/response vending machine. Put in a quarter and get your Kit-Kat bar. Hit the button, get a pellet.

And it sure sounds like it should work. But — it never does.

The Old Scout knows better. He learned years ago, setting up camp in the woods with his mates, that that teams are not black boxes, and that people are not puppets who can be made to dance with a tug on their strings.

Scouting values taught him that people are not machines, but actual people, who are entitled to be treated with courtesy and even — it says so right there in the oath — with reverence. As members of the troop, they must be protected. But at the same time they require teaching and discipline. First, because they really are entitled to that kind of treatment.

And second, because treating them that way is the only way to get decent results.

Two reasons for failure But back to the problem. You assigned Jane a task and a deadline, both of which she has since blown.

There are really only two possible reasons for her failure. The first is that she was unable to do it – a question of ability. The second is that she didn’t want to do it – and that is a question of motivation.

You desperately want it to be a matter of ability, because, remember – truly motivating people is a very tall order. Whereas, ability is a managerial issue: you can address it methodically, using a set of checkpoints.

For example: If Jane says, “I wasn’t up to it,” that’s an easy problem to solve. You don’t expect to change the person fundamentally, adding twenty IQ points, or injecting a solution that gives them a degree in particle physics, or suddenly making them six inches taller. So you reassign that person to something they are up to — or you direct them to a different career. Or you train them, guide them, mentor them, give them job learning assignments. It’s not fun, but “I can’t do this” has a very clear situation.

In Jane’s case, the explanation may be “I didn’t do it because I don’t speak Spanish.” Maybe she was the wrong person to assign to the task for this reason. Maybe it’s not too late for her to learn Spanish. Maybe you needed to explain to her that she could do this task entirely in English.

Ability has another dimension: resources.

· “I couldn’t do it because I didn’t understand.”

· “I didn’t do it because I needed help.”

· “I didn’t do it because I didn’t have bus fare.”

All these are ability problems that can easily be solved: by explaining, by adding manpower, by making a withdrawal from the petty cash drawer. They are the kinds of problems scouts (and good managers) solve all the time.

Then there’s:

· “I didn’t compile your list because I am drinking a fifth of vodka every night before crashing on my couch.”

· “I bus for two hours every morning to get to work, and then I am exhausted all day.”

· “My daughter has cystic fibrosis.”

These are more serious issues, and we deal with them in greater depth in Chapter 5. They include chemical problems, family problems, and situational problems that keep a person from performing. They still constitute an ability, not a motivational issue — and are still easy to solve, relative to “I don’t care if this gets done or not.”

Whereas motivation requires you to figure the individual out. It means venturing into

Crazy

Land, the mysterious eccentric workings of the individual mind. Better to hang a banner in the cafeteria than delve into why when Jane looks up at you she is thinking about her father, and that ain’t good. Psychology is a task most of us very sensibly shy away from.

How do you know which it is? Is it Jane’s ability or her lack of motivation that brought you to this pass?

Get answers to the following manager’s questions, and you will know if the problem is ability or motivation:

· “Did you set clear expectations?” Did Jane know what she had to do? Did you ask at the time if she understood? If it was all vague, but you didn’t quiz her about its clarity, then the problem is not with Jane at all.

· “Did you set goals and objectives?” Did Jane understand that she had to prepare a written report? If you assumed she understood this, but didn’t check to see, the finger points back at you.

· “Did you set a time frame?” Without a deadline, there is no way to measure success. “Oh you mean you want it now? Why didn’t you say so?”

· “Did you establish progress checkpoints along the way?” Unless your employee is an intuitive genius, who can read your every thought, you need to check in with that person at regular intervals, to ask the telling question “How’s it going?”

At the progress check-points, if there is a gap between the estimated and the observed, however, you have found your problem. If the estimated quality of a task was GOOD, and the observed quality of its execution was less than that, you must ask the person what happened, what explains the discrepancy.

The next words out of the teammate’s mouth will tell whether the problem was due to ability or motivation.

· “I didn’t know how to keep the colors from separating.” (Ability)

· “I thought the for-rent sign was supposed to say ROOM TOILET.” (Ability)

· “I was afraid you’d get mad if I spent the entire budget.” (Ability)

· “I tried to get someone to help me but they were all busy.” (Ability)

· “I figured good enough was good enough.” (Motivation)

· “I just never got around to it.” (Motivation)

Be sure that the answer you want to get, most of the time, is ability, and not motivation. And though these explanations put much of the onus for failure back on you – because you have to train, explain, and supervise your team members — this is still cause for celebration.

Welcome to Crazyland The second possibility, lack of motivation, is more serious. It requires you to venture into the individual’s inner world, to figure out why this person is being so difficult.

This is not a place you want to be. Leaders are not psychologists, and should not pretend they are. We have seen managers with a book of psychobabble under their belts try to “understand” team members. It is about as graceful a process as squashing grapes in a vat.

But when a leader determines that a performance issue is a motivational problem, leaders are to engage team members in a straightforward process of communicating consequences. These consequences are to be communicated in order, from least threatening to most threatening, until they comply.

These are the four stages of consequences, in the prescribed order:

to self and job. If you don’t do your work, it reflects on your record with us.

to others (guilt). If you don’t do your work, your team mates will have to pick up your slack.

to boss. I need you to work with me to achieve this goal, or I will fail.

3 ½ ) Pause … During which the leader tries to figure out why

the team member still hasn’t complied.

4) the nuclear option. You will be terminated if you do not do as I ask.

The only time leaders are to probe deeper into the individual’s personal problems is in-between consequences # 3 and # 4,

This is a journey fraught with scary questions, not least of which are: What right do you have messing around with an employee’s psyche? And how much time and energy are you willing to invest in this person who is not functioning? Do I really want to know about any potential personal problems of this particular employee?

Managers are switch-flippers. Leaders look deeper into causes and effects. Sometimes this means taking a peek into a person’s heart. The good news is that you have a stout lifeline to hold onto, so that you can find your way back – the values of Scouting. When in doubt, lean on them!

The New 80/20 Rule In management theory there is something called The 80/20 Rule. You probably know one version of it, that says that the wise leader spends 80% of his time with the bottom 20% performers (read, the losers) trying to coax them to improve their performance.

But that rule has been revised. The new wisdom is that you should spend 80% of your time with the 20% top performers (read, the winners) letting them know how very important they are to you/ Why? Because they produce about 80% of the results you are looking for. You don’t want them to feel unappreciated!

Angels and piglets Some team members are practically angels. They want to do the right thing, as well as it can be done, without being told to, without supervision. If you know where to hire these people, you may want to violate the Scouts ethic of “Share and share alike” and keep that address to yourself locked in a safe buried under a mountain. Because people like this are ideal team members. They are human gold. You never need to do anything to spur them on. Don’t even try to understand them, just be grateful they are in your employ.

On the other end of the continuum are those unfortunates – we call them piglets, after the forlorn figure in the Winnie the Pooh stories — who do not seem to be motivatable by anything short of constant nagging. Is their nature that they lack spark. In scouting a piglet is the boy who thinks he hates hiking, who has convinced himself he is in terrible pain, and he absolutely must be allowed to rest. In the workplace it is the employee who stops moving when you stop hitting him over the head. (Figuratively speaking.)

Piglets may be damaged by circumstances in their lives, or they may simply be acting out of personality difficulties. Often they are so frustrating, and take so much more time to direct than other workers, that leaders cut them loose. It can be very draining to keep difficult people motivated, and leaders must ask themselves if they are up to this level of human micromanagement.

Some leaders keep at it, because, for whatever reason (”I guess I just like Al.”) they want to. They install constant checkpoints for these people (these checkpoints have to be almost as close together as “Inhale. Now exhale.”) so that they are under essentially continuous automatic review — which keeps them moving toward the finish line. It’s a lot of trouble, but there is often a pay-off in loyalty.

Sometimes piglets want the constant quasi-abuse, because they know it is the only way they will stay on task. They need the whip in order to live. (”Come on, Gus, you can do it, just keep moving those feet, up-down, one-two!”) And it is to their credit that they keep slogging along, not performing as well as the others, but not quitting, either. A leader must decide what to do with his litter of piglets. Are they a drag on the team? Often, they are. But most teams are diverse — they do not march in lockstep, with identical skills and attitudes. Every roundup needs a cook. Maybe Gus is the cook you need.

Stewed frogs Those are the extremes — the angels and the oafs. In between are the vast majority of utterly human team members, who have little of the angel in them, and only a whiff of the pig. These are the rank and filers who are motivated in the conventional ways – with anxiety and reward.

There is a famous story about stewed frogs. If you place a frog in cold water and place the pot on the stove, it never seems to occur to the frog to panic and leap out of the pot. Without an alarm going off, he sits – and eventually stews.

This phenomenon is roughly what happens on teams that have purged all anxiety. In a 100% stress-free atmosphere no one is afraid of anything. Then one day the axe falls, or the dam breaks, or fire breaks out, and the casualty count is huge. A little anxiety prompted by good leadership (“If we don’t get in gear here, we’re all going to be stewed frogs!”) would we saved that team.

So we are saying that leader must keep team members apprised of reality. If the water temperature is on the rise, the leader must inform the team of this, and issue orders that allow them to escape unstewed (“Jump, boys!).

Still, this idea rankles many people. It seems harsh, leaders scaring their employees. It may sound harsh, but it is not at all at odds with scout theory. Scouts routinely venture forth into danger, but at all times the watchword is “Be prepared.” Anticipate things going wrong. The slogan might almost be, “Be anxious.” Not in a sick way, but in a clear-headed, realistic way.

What do good leaders do? They tell the truth. They tell it whether the truth is nice, or scary.

The key is to be proportionate. Certainly, never invent danger in order to motivate. That’s lying. But don’t panic people with the truth, either. Don’t make danger out to be worse than it is. But even more important, don’t make it out to be less than it is – that is a terrible disservice, lulling the team into a false feeling of safety, just as the temperature around them is measurably rising.

Why team? One rule I recommend to leaders is that they remember that the team goal (e.g., “Sell 20,000 phone cards in the month of October.”) is never the reason a person is a team member. No one cares about phone cards, really. People are on teams for a variety of other reasons. Obviously, the team is a way to earn a living. Less obvious, the team offers people a chance to show off their skills, to compete, to be with other people, to learn, to hear the sound of their own voices.

Leaders who overlook this fact — that people are not on teams for the simple joy of it — well, they are idiots. Leaders who try to understand what each team member is after on the team, and makes it part of his job to see that they get what they want — they do amazing things. They win the loyalty of employees who maybe couldn’t give two hoots about the phone cards, or whatever.

It does not have to be a single burning thing, like helping Hamlet avenge his father’s death. It may be totally symbolic: “You look like you need a victory, Jake.”

Abandoning the astroturf Many times you appear to have a motivation problem because of miscommunication. Look what happened in real life with Jane, the woman assigned to compile the list of foundations.

“Jane, you didn’t come through for me on that list of foundations. That concerns me.”

Jane looks up. “Are you going to fire me?”

“I’m not thinking about firing anyone today. But I want to talk to you a moment and try to understand better.”

“Well, I started to. There’s a big list online, and it’s not hard to feed it the keyword Hispanic and come up with a list.”

“So why didn’t you do that?”

“I wanted to. I know it’s what you told me to do,” Jane says nervously.

“And?”

“But I kept thinking, is this really the best way to do this? The reason we want the list is to apply for grants. If we have a list of forty foundations, we create a shell letter and send the application to them all.”

“That doesn’t sound so bad.”

“But, it is bad. I’ve worked for a foundation, as a clerk. And I saw what the people there thought of these processed letters. They called it ‘astroturf.’ Meaning, a mass mailing. Spam.”

“So what did you do?”

“I wasn’t sure if I should show it to you, but I started writing a letter to this one foundation in

El Paso that I think would be perfect for our request.”

“Jane, that sounds terrific. I like the initiative. I like the fact that you’re thinking and not just following orders like a robot. Can I see the letter?”

“Well, I haven’t finished it yet, but — here, I’ll print out what I have so far.”

“Jane — Jane — listen to me.”

“Yes, Mister

Ferguson?”

“Do you know what they call people who don’t do what they’re told, and branch off on their own?”

“No, sir.”

“Entrepreneurs. This is good work, Jane. Let’s meet again tomorrow and see where we go from here.”

“Yes, sir.”

“And one more thing.”

“Yes sir?”

“Print off the list anyway, would you? I want to see who else is on it.”

“Yes sir!”

Something stupid You never know what incentive will work for people. A parking space close to the front entrance. Their name on the bulletin board winner’s list. Tickets to see Garth Brooks. Perhaps the most beautiful thing about motivation is that it can be something really stupid.

We know an office that passes around a stuffed raccoon with a set of purple velvet moose antlers sewn onto its head. What the moose and squirrel mean, apart from some obscure reference to Rocky and Bullwinkle, we do not know. But we know that people in the office make a big deal when it is their turn to have it on their desks. It says: You belong. It says: We know who you are. People like that, and they respond to it by giving their best effort.

Yes, they still want what they originally wanted — to pay the rent, to meet girls, to add a line to their resume. But now they want something more besides. They want to repay your interest in them. They want to thank you for your humanness. They want to deserve your trust. They want to help you to succeed.

There’s something very close to love in what we are saying. This should not be a big surprise. Because love and respect are the most powerful motivators of all.

Harvey A. Robbins is a licensed psychologist, whose critically acclaimed book Why Teams Don’t Work (Peterson's Pacesetters Books), co-authored with Michael Finley, won the Financial Times/Booz Allen & Hamilton Global Business Book Award. Robbins is an important voice in today's increasingly diverse business environment specializing in team and leadership/executive development (including succession planning), change management, performance feedback systems, and creating collaborative environments. He brings his wide-ranging experience with America's major corporations to international readers in his books, which inform, challenge and entertain. Since 1974, Robbins has consulted with numerous companies and federal/state/local agencies, including ATF, American Express, Allied Signal, FMC, General Dynamics, AT&T, 3M, Honeywell, IRS, International Multifoods, Johnson & Johnson, Nabisco, Southern Company, Target Stores, Toro, US West, U.S. Customs and the U.S. Secret Service, and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Division of the U.S. Navy.