Hardly a week goes by without a trade magazine coming out with a theory on motivation. And every year, these magazines offer an exclusive investigation into the reasons that drive us to work.
To this, you can add the daily surveys that find their way onto LinkedIn and ask us THE killer question: "What motivates you at work?".
Of course, there are a few variations: "What gets you up in the morning?" or "What's the most important thing about your job?".
All these questions have one thing in common: motivating factors.
But none of these surveys is of any interest. No scientific interest, of course, but no social or even managerial interest. In most cases, the results are contradictory from one survey to the next.
For example, four surveys have been carried out in the last ten years:
What can we conclude from these results? Nothing. It's impossible to conclude anything. None of these results is usable because they mix up all the motivating factors as if they all had the same value and as if they all touched on our same needs.
Yet it's easy enough to distinguish between our wants and our needs, our desires and necessities.
Even if the pleasure of the work and the atmosphere with colleagues are very important to an employee's level of motivation, his or her salary is and remains the primary reason for working. Even nurses and teachers have demonstrated for a re-evaluation of their salaries. Those who were thought to be so committed that they could work for a pittance also protested at the lack of salary recognition for their efforts.
Working is a constrained activity. Why accept these constraints without fair compensation? And this first quid pro quo is the wage by its very nature.
These surveys are, therefore, great fun and serve to question managers on the level of satisfaction of their teams. But they make two mistakes:
As an employee responding to a survey of this type, I'll look for explanations congruent with my motivation linked to my social identity and ego. So, chances are I'm not being totally rational in my response but rather influenced by the desire to justify my behavior... a posteriori!
For the observer, what's important is the behavior, not the situation: he'll compare the actor with other people, perhaps himself; he'll, therefore, be led to make internal attributions. On the other hand, the actor evaluates his behavior in relation to his other behaviors: what's different, then, is the situation, which becomes more important in his eyes. Ultimately, behavior perceived by the observer as a consequence of the actor's intention will be considered by the same actor as a response to the situation.[5]
To avoid this bias, it is useful to remind the participant to respond rationally and rationally. Simply reminding them that they may be subject to bias positively influences their thinking.
We're not all motivated to work for the same reasons. What's more, we can each have many reasons for working.
These reasons respond to our own needs and desires, linked to our temperament, age, and education, but also to our heritage, beliefs, and mental state.
To avoid mixing up needs, necessities, desires, and cravings, it's essential to categorize the sources of motivation. These sources fall into four categories:
Most of us work to earn a wage, to "make a living" - admit it, this expression is dramatic - and to support ourselves.
We need social recognition, and work, a profession, or simply the fact of having a job, contributes to this recognition, this belonging, this integration.
Working is also an opportunity to develop, to perform, to master. The desire for mastery, and sometimes power, are key motivating factors, even outside work.
Giving meaning to one's activity is a natural and profound expectation many workers express. Whether it's a purpose in an internal company process or, even more, a role in building a society in line with the employee's own values.
As you can see, it's impossible to equate material necessity with societal desire. Mixing these categories in the same questionnaire creates a more or less conscious feeling of discomfort, which must be resolved by a "lie" to maintain our social identity.
If you draw up a satisfaction questionnaire to determine how motivated your teams are, I advise you to make a clear distinction between these four categories. This will enable everyone to answer honestly, without fear of touching on moral and sanctimonious values.
[1] http://cerclepourlamotivation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/synthese_enquete_2014_cerclepourlamotivation-DEF.pdf
[2] Infographie: Le salaire, première motivation des Européens
https://fr.statista.com/infographie/14017/le-salaire-premiere-motivation-des-europeens/
[3] https://www.ifop.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Slideshow20PWP20201920VF.pdf
[4] Motivations des Français au travail 2020 | Statista
https://fr.statista.com/statistiques/1180896/classement-motivation-a-travailler-france/
[5] Carré Philippe, Fenouillet Fabien, Traité de psychologie de la motivation. Théories et pratiques. Dunod, « Éducation Sup », 2019, URL : (https://www.cairn.info/--.htm)