3 ms·

Actually profit as a motivation does not work for highly skilled work. If you put a monetary reward for solving a problem the solution usually gets worse. "Bas

by acd 7y ago

Actually profit as a motivation does not work for highly skilled work. If you put a monetary reward for solving a problem the solution usually gets worse. "Based on studies done at MIT and other universities,[4] higher pay and bonuses resulted in better performance ONLY if the task consisted of basic, mechanical skills. It worked for problems with a defined set of steps and a single answer. If the task involved cognitive skills, decision-making, creativity, or higher-order thinking, higher pay resulted in lower performance" source: book The Drive by Dan Pink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive:_The_Surprising_Truth_About_What_Motivates_Us https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive:_The_Surprising_Truth_Ab... Ted talk https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation

ilaksh 7y ago
That's exactly the type of hogwash executives promote in order to avoid rewarding engineers so they can keep more profits for themselves.
- swagasaurus-rex 7y ago
  There's one very important thing keeping me and everybody from destitution: an income. Profit motive might not make me more creative (debatable) but it will certainly enable me to work for years on end.
goatinaboat 7y ago
Actually profit as a motivation does not work for highly skilled work. If that is true then it logically follows that management is not highly skilled work, no? Do the people who come up with these theories even bother to think it through at all?
- solidasparagus 7y ago
  I take it you couldn't be bothered to read the links or look at the research behind the theory before ridiculing it? The idea is that after a certain point, financial motivation doesn't lead to better work - to motivate you need to fulfill higher-level needs like ownership, purpose, autonomy, etc. Your statement about management not being skilled work makes no sense. Do you have some evidence that paying managers more leads to better performance?
  - goatinaboat 7y ago
    Do you have some evidence that paying managers more leads to better performance? There is no such evidence yet manager’s reward themselves and their peers lavishly anyway. That’s the point. The research is a scam to justify underpaying skilled workers so management can keep it all for themselves.
    - solidasparagus 7y ago
      That is literally the opposite of what the research says. It says that after a certain point, financial reward is not a good way to encourage strong performance. It says low-wage workers can be incentivized with higher pay, but high-wage workers need more intrinsic reward because pay is not an effective incentive once people are financially comfortable. At least open the wikipedia page before making such completely incorrect statements.
      - goatinaboat 7y ago
        financial reward is not a good way to encourage strong performance And yet managers are highly paid and incentivised with large bonuses. How do you explain that paradox if pay is not an incentive? Managers can reward themselves and their peers with literally anything and they always choose more money. How do you explain it? Theory and Wikipedia are fine but look at what actually happens in the real world. I read the original research in HBR when it was first published by the way. I didn’t believe it then either.
        solidasparagus 7y ago
        Because people prioritize their personal finances over company performance? That doesn't sound surprising to me. This is also relatively new and it takes time for traditions to change. When it comes to the real world, you can clearly see this research in action, particularly in the world of software. There has been a shift from offering pure financial incentive (e.g. working in finance) towards more intrinsic rewards (mission-driven, autonomy, ownership, etc that most top-end software companies prioritize)
- atq2119 7y ago
  Maybe they did, and the correct conclusion is that (excessively) high pay for management is entirely unjustified?
- acd 7y ago
  I was trying to say that high compensation levels on management level may not lead to the best results for the company. Neither may chasing quarterly profits to have a good stock level. Thus engineering goals and management goals may not be the same.

by acd 7y ago

ilaksh 7y ago

That's exactly the type of hogwash executives promote in order to avoid rewarding engineers so they can keep more profits for themselves.

swagasaurus-rex 7y ago
There's one very important thing keeping me and everybody from destitution: an income. Profit motive might not make me more creative (debatable) but it will certainly enable me to work for years on end.

goatinaboat 7y ago

Actually profit as a motivation does not work for highly skilled work. If that is true then it logically follows that management is not highly skilled work, no? Do the people who come up with these theories even bother to think it through at all?

solidasparagus 7y ago
I take it you couldn't be bothered to read the links or look at the research behind the theory before ridiculing it? The idea is that after a certain point, financial motivation doesn't lead to better work - to motivate you need to fulfill higher-level needs like ownership, purpose, autonomy, etc. Your statement about management not being skilled work makes no sense. Do you have some evidence that paying managers more leads to better performance?
- goatinaboat 7y ago
  Do you have some evidence that paying managers more leads to better performance? There is no such evidence yet manager’s reward themselves and their peers lavishly anyway. That’s the point. The research is a scam to justify underpaying skilled workers so management can keep it all for themselves.
  - solidasparagus 7y ago
    That is literally the opposite of what the research says. It says that after a certain point, financial reward is not a good way to encourage strong performance. It says low-wage workers can be incentivized with higher pay, but high-wage workers need more intrinsic reward because pay is not an effective incentive once people are financially comfortable. At least open the wikipedia page before making such completely incorrect statements.
    - goatinaboat 7y ago
      financial reward is not a good way to encourage strong performance And yet managers are highly paid and incentivised with large bonuses. How do you explain that paradox if pay is not an incentive? Managers can reward themselves and their peers with literally anything and they always choose more money. How do you explain it? Theory and Wikipedia are fine but look at what actually happens in the real world. I read the original research in HBR when it was first published by the way. I didn’t believe it then either.
      - solidasparagus 7y ago
        Because people prioritize their personal finances over company performance? That doesn't sound surprising to me. This is also relatively new and it takes time for traditions to change. When it comes to the real world, you can clearly see this research in action, particularly in the world of software. There has been a shift from offering pure financial incentive (e.g. working in finance) towards more intrinsic rewards (mission-driven, autonomy, ownership, etc that most top-end software companies prioritize)
atq2119 7y ago
Maybe they did, and the correct conclusion is that (excessively) high pay for management is entirely unjustified?
acd 7y ago
I was trying to say that high compensation levels on management level may not lead to the best results for the company. Neither may chasing quarterly profits to have a good stock level. Thus engineering goals and management goals may not be the same.