Episode Transcript
[00:00:06] Speaker A: Welcome to the Leadership Window podcast with Doctor Patrick Jinks. Each week, through a social sector lens, Patrick interviews leaders and experts and puts us in touch with trends and tips for leading effectively. Patrick is a board certified executive coach, a member of the Forbes Coaches Council, a best selling author, award winning photographer, and a professional speaker. And now here's Doctor Patrick Jinks.
[00:00:30] Speaker B: And welcome to episode episode 123 of the leadership Window. I am Doctor Patrick Jinks. This is going to be a short one. Today I want to cover something that we cover a lot in our one on one coaching and even in our team coaching. It's a concept. It's actually an academic framework and construct called self determination theory. If you've studied psychology, you've come across self determination theory. If you've done any work in the area of employee engagement, you've probably come across it. And even if you haven't, even if the term itself is not familiar to you, self determination theory, the chances are you have come in contact with the three elements that make up self determination theory. So it's a psychological framework that explores human motivation and personality, particularly focusing on the innate psychological needs that drive behavior and well being.
And central to self determination theory is the idea that people have three fundamental needs.
They are autonomy, competence and relatedness.
Autonomy, competence and relatedness. And when these needs are fulfilled, people tend to experience more motivation, personal growth, overall well being.
On the flip side, when these needs are not being met, motivation tends to decline and there's a negative psychological outcome that occurs. So self determination theory distinguishes between intrinsic motivation, which comes from within. We've talked about that before, and it's driven by personal interest and satisfaction. And then there's the extrinsic motivation, which is influenced by external rewards or pressures. One of the other terms that you'll hear if you've studied in this area is Herzberg's theory of motivation and the motivating factors versus the hygienic factors. We might talk a little bit about that today. I'll tell you why. I'm making this its own episode and carving time out to cover this framework for leaders.
It is, in my estimation, one of the most powerful things a leader can learn and do to understand this idea of self determination and creating an environment where your people are most likely to be self determined or self initiated, self fulfilled, that's what we want, right? We want our employees to be engaged, take initiative, love what they do, contribute to what they do, give more, give their best, let their gifts and talents make room for themselves, perform at high levels, create value set the tone, culture, the whole thing. That's what we want. In order for that to happen, that has to come from inside the employee. So one of the things we've said before is that leaders don't actually motivate people. Motivation is intrinsic. It comes from within, it's internal. We don't put motivation into somebody. What a leader does, an effective leader, is draw out the motivation and connect it to the work that needs to be done. Dwight Eisenhower defined leadership as the art of getting people to do things you want done because they want to do it. So it's about connecting the individual's motivation with the work that needs to be done in a way that people can feel self determined, self initiated, self fulfilled. So we're just going to talk about these three things, because what I say a lot, and I believe this, I really do, I believe that a leader's primary job is to create an environment where these three things can flourish among their people. Autonomy, competence, and relatedness. So we'll talk about each one of those. By the way, if you want to look up any of the academic work on this, just look up anything by Edward Dessie and or Ryan. I'm sorry, Richard Ryan.
Edward Dessie and Richard Ryan, prolific writers and researchers on this topic since probably the eighties. And their work has influenced a lot of fields, education and sports, even health, and certainly the field of the workplace. If you've also, if you want to, if you want to read something that's a little less sort of high academic, but it focuses on self determination, read Daniel Pink's book drive. You probably have heard of that book bestseller for a long time. It's drive by Daniel Pink. And in that book he talks about, I think the subtitle is the surprising truth about what motivates us. And hint, it's not money. Turns out it's not. It's not those hygienic things that Herzberg talks about, you know, are my benefits good? Is my pay good? My workspace? You know, those kinds of things.
They matter. They, they matter to people, but they aren't what drives and motivates and draws out the best out of people. It kind of almost works in the opposite. Herzberg's theory says that there are certain factors, the hygienic ones, that will demotivate you if they're not there, but they don't necessarily motivate you when they are there. So there's a certain threshold, a certain amount, for example, that a person has to be paid in order to feel fulfilled. But it's not the pay that fulfills them. However, if some of those job satisfaction things falter and they're not satisfying and they're disappointing and they're, at the worst, toxic, those become the demotivators, not the motivators. The motivators are autonomy, competence, and relatedness, or what Daniel Pink in his book drive, calls autonomy, mastery, and purpose.
Same things said a little bit different way. So let's, let's talk about these, these three things. If you're a leader in your organization, particularly if you have direct reports and those under direct reports, you could think about your job as a leader in these three categories, that your job is to create an environment where people can experience the greatest degree possible and appropriate of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Let's start with autonomy. First of all, autonomy is not, I get to do whatever I want. I don't answer anybody. I don't report to anybody. I'm on my own. That's not what we mean by autonomy. Autonomy is I have some agency, I have some decision making ability. I have some control over how I do my work. My voice matters. It's part of the equation when decisions are made.
I have influence over certainly my work, if not more.
So how do you extend autonomy to people? Think about it. It's pretty common. It's pretty much common sense. Delegation is one way to extend autonomy, but this is, this, this will help you. When you think about delegation, think about a delegation that would extend autonomy, and think about a delegation that wouldn't. If you're just dumping work on someone because you don't want to do it, and it's not a growth opportunity and it's going to frustrate the employee and you're increasing their bandwidth beyond what they actually have, that's not going to be a autonomy. That's not going to be an engaging factor. But if you have an employee who is gifted and skilled and ready to be challenged, ready to lead something, delegate something of significance, something that is an invitation to them to lead a project, an initiative, a meeting, a department, delegate significance, delegate opportunity, create that autonomy.
Early on, when we first started talking about self determination theory, I was working in a, an organization that had a big call center, and we came up with the question, how do you extend autonomy to an entry level call center agent? Think about this. Call center agents. Let's take the, let's take a stereotypical one. Maybe, maybe there's even uniforms in this company. And, you know, everyone's wearing the same golf shirt with the same logo. The call center has 100 people in it, or maybe a thousand people in it. And they're all in a cubicle. And all the cubicles are identical. The phones are identical. Everything is the same. The script, the hours they have to clock in and clock out. They're told when to be there, when to be in their seats, how long they can take on a call, what they're allowed to say, what they're not allowed to say, how long their breaks can be, what decision making ability they have when they're on the phone with a customer or a client or whoever it is. And when you think about it, there doesn't sound. There doesn't seem to be a lot of autonomy in a call center environment.
So how does a leader, if self determination theory is right and people want the greatest sense of autonomy, competence and relatedness they can get, how does the leader increase autonomy for that call center agent? Well, they might, for example, ask their opinion about things. How are things going? What would you change?
What issues are you having with the script? Where are you feeling the need to be more adaptable? What struggles or challenges are you coming up against? What would you do in the work environment to make it, you know, to raise the morale of the group, whatever that is. Just asking someone their opinion actually extends a small degree of autonomy because you're telling them, I value what you say. And while you might not be the one who gets to decide how this all works, your voice is part of the equation in the decision making process. We're going to listen to it. Another way to extend autonomy for a call center agent is let a call center agent be a shift supervisor for a night, just to. Just to give them that experience. Maybe fill in for someone, maybe. Maybe shadow someone. Create a mentoring program where call center agents are able to sort of step above train them, which gets into the competence side here in a moment. But the autonomy piece, how much flexibility can you give them? Do you have to have work uniforms? Could you allow people to dress the way they want to dress? Within reason.
Could you change what they're able to do with their cubicle space?
Could you create some, you know, innovative think space environments? Could you create a more flexible schedule?
Flexibility, by the way, the number one thing that employees want today, it's not even the ability to work remote, although people like that, too. Some people. But flexibility, the ability to adjust my scheduled hours based on my other life needs. How much of that can you create within a call center?
And we start with the call center example, because that seems the most challenging. How do you create autonomy among a bunch of employees who essentially might feel like they're just another number. They're clocking in, they're clocking out, they're coming in, doing their thing, and they're leaving.
That's a question leaders have to ask themselves. Number two, competence.
People want to be good at what they do. They want to feel like they're good at what they do. They want to be getting better at what they do. They want to grow and learn more and be an expert. What they do, it drives a lot of engagement when people feel competent and they feel mastery of their craft.
I had, I had a call center agent in another organization that I worked with who was just absolutely outstanding and so good and had some other gifts and talents, particularly in the area of marketing and design. And I offered her a promotion straight up to be our marketing director. Shes a call center agent taking information and referral calls from people who might need all kinds of different social help.
And she had done it for a number of years, and she was absolutely extraordinary at it. And I offered her the promotion. She flat out turned it down on the spot without hesitation. I said, wait a minute. This is probably double or more the money you're making. It's a director position, straight up. I mean, this gives you a place to use your gifts and talents. And she said, my, my gifts and talents? I've got place to use those. What I'm really, really, really good at is helping people when they're calling for help. I'm good at directing them. I'm good at listening to them. I'm good at calming their fears. I'm good at giving them reassurance and making them feel safer. I'm good at following through and making sure they're connected to the resources that they need. I'm good at collecting the data that tells us how effectively we're doing this and how many calls and what issues. And I'm really good at it, and I love it.
And I thought, wow, that is powerful to be so in love with competence and purpose, that relatedness piece that you would turn down an opportunity like that, which was proof to me that money and position are not what drives people. It's not what motivates them. And so that was a great learning experience for me. People want to be good at what they're doing. So how does a leader shape an environment where people can increase their competence? Well, one is obvious. Train them, give them training opportunities. Give them development opportunities. Some of that happens internally. Stretch them, give them the next responsibility. Give them a little more than maybe they think they can handle. Be careful with that. But stretch them. Give them external training, send them to conferences, send them to workshops, get to help them get certifications, do tuition reimbursement, whatever it takes to help them build competence in their area. Get them a mentor inside the organization. Make sure you're doing onboarding well. Make sure your employees are trained to do what you're asking them to do. And by the way, if they're a, in a supervisory or managerial position, make sure you're training them how to do that, too, not just the function. We put a lot of people in supervisor positions who aren't ready to be supervisors. They were just good fundraisers, or they were just good it technicians, or they were good accountants, but they're not good managers, and they don't know how. So, building their competence. What is your role as a leader to build the competence of your people. Now, here's something that connects to competence, and that is recognition.
People want to be competent, and one thing that gives them that sense of competence is being recognized for their competence.
So recognizing them takes a lot of different forms. It's not just, hey, good job, right? It's not just an employee of the month award.
Recognizing them sometimes means giving them even more, more responsibility. Sometimes it's a promotion and a raise.
Sometimes it's opportunities to lead certain projects and initiatives that maybe interest them.
Sometimes it is that letter, that card, that public praise at a board meeting that thanks somebody for how well they did something. That recognition is critical. One of the things that will demotivate someone, if they continue to perform and nobody acknowledges their amazing work, they'll start to disengage. They don't want to because they know they're good at what they do. But if they're not feeling recognized for that good, that starts to decline.
So, as a leader, how are you shaping an environment where your people have the greatest opportunity to build their competence? And then the third piece of self determination, relatedness.
In the construct of this, people want to feel related to two things at least.
One is the mission. They want to feel related to the organization and what it does. Like, I have a sense of belonging. I identify with this. This connects with who I am and what I want to do. So I have a sense of identity with the mission. It relates to me, it drives me, it inspires me. But the other thing is, I want to feel a sense of relatedness with my leaders, and in particular, my immediate supervisor.
So year after year, one of, if not the top driver of employee engagement in the research bears out to be an employee's relationship with their immediate supervisor. You've heard it said people join companies. They leave managers. That relationship with that immediate supervisor is absolutely critical to keeping an employee engaged. So how are you, as a leader, helping your employees feel connected to the mission?
What do all of your employees at all levels, understand about the organization's strategy, its values, its mission, its core functions?
Do people feel like, I am a part of this and I can see my place on the strategic map? I can see how what I'm doing helps drive this mission that I care about. How are you intentionally doing that with your employees? Please don't assume that your employees will make that connection on their own. Well, they came here because they said they wanted to make a difference. They knew. They knew what organization they were joining. They know our mission.
Yes, but how is the leader helping them connect the dots on a daily basis between maybe some tedious work that they're doing and the greater mission or the greater cause?
Next, how is the leader. How are you, as a leader, fostering an environment where your employees feel connected to and related to you? They feel a sense of identity.
They feel like it makes sense that they work with you, that you are their leader. They connect with it. It resonates. They feel a part of it. They feel a part of your leadership.
How are you doing that as a leader?
I ask this question. Sometimes people go, I don't. I don't know. I just. You know, it's kind of organic. I mean, it can't be perfunctory. It can't just be. I. There's three things that I just do, but. But it does have to be intentional. So how do you do it? How do you spend your. I asked this question of a group the other day.
I said, how much time in a week do you spend one on one with each of your direct reports? So think about this for a minute. For you, listening to this episode, how much time do you spend one on one with any of your direct reports? And if you don't have any direct reports, ask the question, how much time do I spend with my immediate supervisor? Right. How much time did they spend with me in a week? Is it an hour a week? Is it even that? Is it 10 hours a week? How much time are you spending? But now, here's the more important question, because when I asked that question, we had a range in the room. People said, you know, an hour or two, maybe. I had others said, ten to 12 hours a week. So the next question was, how are you spending that time?
Because if the person who's spending an hour or two a week is using that time more effectively to build autonomy, competence, and mastery, then the person who's meeting one on one for ten to 12 hours, going over checklists and to do lists and, you know, things that. That could be done in an email, but take 3 hours in a meeting to go over, how are you spending that time?
Quantity and quality.
How are we creating a sense of relatedness?
I have had a number of people in organizations tell me, I don't know if our organization has a strategic plan. I've never seen it.
Would your employees say that? Would they say, I've never. I don't know. I've never. I guess I think we have a strategic plan.
I can't tell you how many companies I've heard this from, how many organizations who have said, I have no idea what's in our strategic plan. I know it's in my job description. I know what I'm counted on to come do every day and, you know, kind of deliver on this, that, and the other by such and such a time and date on such and such a budget. But I don't know how it fits into some bigger scheme, into some mission driven strategy. Never seen it.
Why would we not want every employee to understand where the organization is going and why and how each part of the machine is critical to getting us there?
Autonomy, competence, relatedness.
Your job as a leader is to create an environment where people have the most chance to have those three things fulfilled in their daily work lives.
And it requires the leader to pause and get intentional about your behaviors, your actions, your practices, your habits that either create that or inhibit that. And when people feel like the leader is more of an inhibitor to autonomy, competence, and relatedness, you lose them. And maybe worse than that, you keep them and they're disengaged, particularly if they're actively disengaged and become toxic in your organization. Why? Because you did not set up an environment where they could feel autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Say, well, isn't it sometimes their fault? Of course. Yeah. Employees aren't perfect. You might have made a bad hire. I know. I've made plenty of them in my career. You might have made a bad hire. You might have made a quick hire. You know, we don't really know somebody until we've worked with them. But you might have made a good hire and not fostered it and taken it for granted and let it go without intentionality around helping them build self determination and that, my friends, is what I wanted to go over with you today. Hopefully that's just a helpful little framework to help you think about your leadership and what you're doing inside the organization. I've said it before, we have to do lists. You know, this week that you've got to work on the budget, you've got to get a grant report in, you've got to have a performance appraisal meeting with an employee, you got to call a donor. What's on your leadership to do list?
What's on your list that's going to help someone build their autonomy, their competence and or their relatedness this week? If you don't have something intentional this week on your list to help do one of those things. I just want to challenge you to get out a notepad, figure out what you're going to do and get really intentional about that. If you can create a culture that in your organization your people will be unstoppable and you'll keep the good ones and weed out the bad ones, that is this leaders perspective for this week. I hope it was helpful and we got some. By the way, I will tell you, we do have a number of guests we're just trying to get scheduled coming on. It's actually been maybe three weeks since we had an episode, but I've got a couple of extraordinary guests coming up. We're just trying to work out scheduling and so stay tuned. We got some great stuff coming up. And, you know, every once in a while I still may pop on here and share a solo episode with something that's on my mind. I hope it's helpful and I hope you have an awesome week. Lead on.
