Illiterate motivation - worse than the lack of any motivation
It often happens that some companies copy some business principles from others - simply because the director of the company has seen somewhere somewhere that something has been done in other companies, and, due to the absence of any knowledge in the relevant field, it is easiest for him to do exactly the same: it seems to work somehow.
In fact, in some cases this will be a mistake. One of the most striking examples is staff motivation. It is in conversations about motivation that many managers show flagrant biological illiteracy.
In fact, the most important thing to realize is that negative motivation, such as fines and various sanctions, does not encourage people to work better. It can only annoy, and really convinces people that they need to quit such a company at the first right opportunity.
Negative motivation leads to quick decisions (whatever, just to jump out from under the motivation as soon as possible), positive - to quality ones (I will work on the result longer and more carefully - maybe the motivation will also last).
')
From the point of view of biology (and in the case of people, it is ultimately applicable only: all the rest is superstructures above it) - for positive stimuli there is a whole huge mesolimbic system in the brain that penetrates it all, but for negative stimuli it is almost not allocated special individual centers (mainly the grief is realized on the principle “there is less happiness” - that is, dopamine - in the same mesolimbic system).
Therefore, it is not surprising that the ineffectiveness of negative motivation is relevant not only for intellectual work. In particular, American biologist and writer Karen Pryor in the book “Do not growl at the dog!” Wrote that positive motivation works much better for dogs than negative, and negative does not work for cats (but positive effect on them is very good) . You can also mention the dolphins, which, again, are trained only by positive reinforcement.
Nothing personal, guys, but at the biological level, training here works this way - the training of personnel in this case is not very different from the training of dolphins. If, in response to some action, negative reinforcement has come, then the brain may remember that it is not necessary to do more. But this is about nothing. He will have 100,500 other misconduct options. This is not learning, but FIG know what. Having received negative reinforcement, a person may no longer specifically make this mistake, but will make many more. But if in response to some action a positive reinforcement came, then the brain will immediately remember that this is it, and this is exactly what needs to be done. That is, from the first time, there was a real, full-fledged training, a clear connection between the stimulus and the reaction.
From this point of view, it would be great if in IT companies to specialists after the correct and high-quality completion of the tasks, someone would approach and embrace them. Because then their hypothalamus would produce oxytocin, and dopamine would appear in the mesolimbic system, and they would definitely have the joy emotionally associated with the correct working process. Unfortunately, this option is not suitable for remote work, and in offices most likely also can not be implemented due to the psychological clampdown of employees.
But even just to say thanks (or something else pleasant) is already effective. That is why I myself try to do it so often, if I really like everything in the result that someone got.
Much of the text is taken from LJ by scientific journalist Asi Kazantseva . The initial observations about learning, in turn, belong to the biologist Alexander Markov .
In fact, in some cases this will be a mistake. One of the most striking examples is staff motivation. It is in conversations about motivation that many managers show flagrant biological illiteracy.
In fact, the most important thing to realize is that negative motivation, such as fines and various sanctions, does not encourage people to work better. It can only annoy, and really convinces people that they need to quit such a company at the first right opportunity.
Negative motivation leads to quick decisions (whatever, just to jump out from under the motivation as soon as possible), positive - to quality ones (I will work on the result longer and more carefully - maybe the motivation will also last).
')
From the point of view of biology (and in the case of people, it is ultimately applicable only: all the rest is superstructures above it) - for positive stimuli there is a whole huge mesolimbic system in the brain that penetrates it all, but for negative stimuli it is almost not allocated special individual centers (mainly the grief is realized on the principle “there is less happiness” - that is, dopamine - in the same mesolimbic system).
Therefore, it is not surprising that the ineffectiveness of negative motivation is relevant not only for intellectual work. In particular, American biologist and writer Karen Pryor in the book “Do not growl at the dog!” Wrote that positive motivation works much better for dogs than negative, and negative does not work for cats (but positive effect on them is very good) . You can also mention the dolphins, which, again, are trained only by positive reinforcement.
Nothing personal, guys, but at the biological level, training here works this way - the training of personnel in this case is not very different from the training of dolphins. If, in response to some action, negative reinforcement has come, then the brain may remember that it is not necessary to do more. But this is about nothing. He will have 100,500 other misconduct options. This is not learning, but FIG know what. Having received negative reinforcement, a person may no longer specifically make this mistake, but will make many more. But if in response to some action a positive reinforcement came, then the brain will immediately remember that this is it, and this is exactly what needs to be done. That is, from the first time, there was a real, full-fledged training, a clear connection between the stimulus and the reaction.
From this point of view, it would be great if in IT companies to specialists after the correct and high-quality completion of the tasks, someone would approach and embrace them. Because then their hypothalamus would produce oxytocin, and dopamine would appear in the mesolimbic system, and they would definitely have the joy emotionally associated with the correct working process. Unfortunately, this option is not suitable for remote work, and in offices most likely also can not be implemented due to the psychological clampdown of employees.
But even just to say thanks (or something else pleasant) is already effective. That is why I myself try to do it so often, if I really like everything in the result that someone got.
Much of the text is taken from LJ by scientific journalist Asi Kazantseva . The initial observations about learning, in turn, belong to the biologist Alexander Markov .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/206728/
All Articles