The Lies We Tell About Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Motivation
According to motivation theory, leadership books, and teacher education classes, everyone should be running on intrinsic motivation, which is “better.”
I go to work to help the “kids.” At work, a common assumption, even an outright statement, is that everything we do is “for the kids.” But if they stopped paying me my salary, I could not — and would not — keep going to the same place to work all day. That extrinsic motivation is not only motivating, it’s necessary. The extrinsic motivation gets me where I want to go in life because it’s tied to money or a career that can take me places, past the necessities of life. Or is that intrinsic motivation?
If I look for and take a promotion at work, am I intrinsically or extrinsically motivated?
One diagram I found online (a cute cartoon) in a Khan Academy article on motivation lists the following examples of intrinsic motivation: pride, achievement, curiosity, interest.
However, what do any of these mean outside of a social context?
Pride and achievement seem to be most meaningful when they’ll be on display in front of others. How many people sit alone in their room feeling proud? Okay, some. I’m one of them, maybe. But how long does that last? I mean, how long are you going to sit in your room alone, feeling proud, huh? Curiosity is an intrinsic motivation, but how long does that last? If you really had no one to communicate with and share your new learnings with, how long would your curiosity last?
What if intrinsic motivation is sustained by social contexts? That’s something I’ve never thought of before. If so, how do we create safe and productive social contexts that multiply, rather than diminish people’s curiosity, pride, achievement and interests?
