There is a lot of buzz about this book, and several people have asked if I’ve read it, so I decided to give it a go. I’m glad I did because it was a good read, a thoughtful analysis of motivation, and confirmed a lot of things that I’ve thought for a long time. But ….

Daniel Pink will get the credit for putting this in print first, but the ideas have been around a long time. In fact, some of the research he uses has been in several other popular books. Much of it is decades old. The companies he cites and the actions they implement are not new examples and have been documented for some time.

The book explores what motives people, or to be consistent with the title of the book, what drives people. Pink points out that economists fundamental belief is that people will make financially rational and self-interested decisions. So, we go to work because we get paid. And we’ll take a different job if it pays more. And we’ll lack motivation if we don’t get a bonus.

There is, of course, a lot of truth to that. But Pink rightfully points out that it’s simplistic and does not reflect the complexities of our motivations. I like how Pink defines our motivations as motivation 1.0 (food, water, sex, etc.), motivation 2.0 (essentially the carrot and stick idea), and then introduces motivation 3.0 (that we need more than just a carrot/stick to stay focused on a job…well, it’s more complicated than that, but this is a short review).

Having worked with volunteers for decades, I understand what Pink is getting at in this book. Tests have shown that giving people tasks (puzzles or simple challenges) and then measuring their performance at solving those tasks is revealing. The people rewarded for solving puzzles get a short term burst of energy that causes them to solve the problems quickly. But when we remove those rewards, or reduce them, they become slow and plodding. On the other hand, people with no reward, who solve the puzzles just because they enjoy the challenge, are just as fast or faster and stay motivated longer.

I’ve seen this over and over with volunteers. Hiring a good volunteer is one of the biggest mistakes I’ve made because it changes the relationship. Suddenly, the volunteer is a paid mercenary, and they are not nearly as motivated or creative. It doesn’t always happen like that, but I’ve seen it too often to ignore the results.

In an age when the idea of management is changing, and we’re seeing a fundamental shift in how to structure organizations, this book is timely. Definitely worth reading. But if you’ll probably find yourself asking, “Didn’t I hear that in another book somewhere?”