The motivation for change
If change is hard, what gives me the energy to do it nevertheless? What keeps me motivated?
Some years ago, I identified three motives that are driving me and by whom I measure whether I am doing the right thing:
- making a difference
- moving something in the hearts of the people
- being good enough for something
It is only the combination of all three that does the trick. That resonates well with a video I watched in the context of a Scrum training:
It tells us three driving forces:
- Autonomy
- Mastery
- Purpose
Change means entering unknown territory — and most often, learning something new. That contradicts mastery, and because as a learner, I am dependent on other people (teaching, advice, patience), my level of autonomy will also decrease drastically. The only motive that can really guide me then is purpose.
When I try to picture of the opposite — a highly independent, very capable person that lacks a true meaning — I immediately think of heroes in all kinds of stories: The protagonist has (or gets) superpowers and rises above the ordinary human needs. But without a proper use for these powers, where is the sense even in a more-than-average life? This is what makes superheroes give up part of their tremendous autonomy to form an association with binding rules.
Now, asks Captain Obvious, if purpose is such a deeply rooted driver of human action, might the best choice to motivate people for change not consist in just not killing their natural strive for meaning? However, a lot of these demotivators are still common at the modern workplace: robbing or hiding the context of the daily work (“Why am i doing this? It does not make any difference.”), blaming or belittling people for trying something out, and the worst of all, micromanaging — ideal for killing autonomy and mastery at the same time!
Micromanagement is a good indicator for a lack of trust. Change therefore needs trust — or at least a leap of faith to begin with.
