“If A is a success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut.”
Albert Einstein

Usually motivation is driven by rewards for success. But here’s a site, Lose it or Lose it, that helps people to lose weight by punishing them (in the form of lost money) for failing to achieve the targets they set themselves. It’s choosing sticks over carrots

It’s an odd premise, especially since users must stake their own money which they ‘win’ back by meeting the weight-loss objectives they set themselves over the 10 week program. The theory is that by declaring publicly the goal (which requires 2 or more ‘accountability’ friends to verify your weigh-ins and support you) and putting something tangible at risk, ie hard cash, you are more likely to achieve them.

But a counter argument is that announcing your plans may make you less motivated. For some people, declaration of action can provide a “premature sense of completeness”, which then results in a reduction in the drive to achieve those plans.

Lose it or lose it is an interesting experiment in try to externalise a process of self-motivation by creating a game-like condition. Self-motivation is a fascinating subject area, full of the little cheats and rules we set ourselves to try and compel us to achieve the goals we desire.

There’s a fair amount of discussion around at the moment about motivation and incentives, largely inspired by the recent book “Drive” by Dan Pink (of which more another time).

Paul Hebert at the i2i blog has got an interesting observation, that what Dan Pink regards as motivation is not the same as what drives behaviour within companies.

So how do we at IncentiveDirect define motivation and incentives? To us, motivation is about personal desires and drives. Incentives are about behaviour and performance.

Incentive programs drive behaviours, provide direction, and they can help feed motivation.
But motivation, like The Force, only comes from within.

A fascinating article in BusinessWeek looks at the unique culture of online shoe retailer Zappos. The company, founded and run by Tony Hsieh, and now part of the Amazon retail empire, believes it has a unique corporate culture that in itself is a marketable commodity. Visitors pay to tour the companies offices and get an insight into the DNA of the company.

As on online business, all you have is your reputation. You have no physical presence. So Zappos goes out of its way to show a human side to the organisation.

Lots of companies like to make out they’re wacky places to work in order to disguise actually how drone like the work is, and where Zappos fits in this picture is uncertain. It’s definitely not something that would come naturally to a British or European company.

If there is anything to learn from Zappos, is that making a unique company culture can be not only good for staff loyalty but also PR and marketing. Motivation systems have a part to play in building a unique company culture, by rewarding the behaviours you want to encourage.

Progressive companies can target certain actions, for instance internal show-and-tell sessions that help staff communicate and build understanding, and reward good presentations. Prizes for internal company team competitions, logged on an online leaderboard, can act to focus everyone’s attention on key issues and create a healthy competitive atmosphere. Many organisations suffer loss of staff morale when employees do not get a sense of the bigger picture and their place in it, and what else is going on around them, Instead, cliques, petty politics and internal dogfighting – negative competitive aspects – undermine the organisation.

A big part of what Zappos do is to try and make work like play. At IncentiveDirect, we believe a more powerful concept is to try and make work like a game.

Discounts reward the people who pay for goods or services, not the people who buy or use them, and if they are not the same person, are an ineffective form of incentive. This is one area where a B2B incentive is very different to a B2C incentive, where the consumer is usually both buyer and user of the service or product being sold.

An incentive scheme aimed at increasing sales should always be aimed at those who make buying decisions.

Extending this further, it is clear that an incentive that is based on rewards rather than on discounts should be targetted at individuals, not organisations. If the people making the buying decisions are not the ones receiving the reward, then it is obvious that the reward has no influence to the person buying that service or product. There is no added incentive for them to buy that brand, or from that supplier, or to buy more, or a better model – the reward has no effect.

Only individuals can be influenced to change their behaviour through the emotional lure of a reward. Considered in the abstract, organisations make decisions based entirely on logic. But individuals within that company will still act emotionally. Buyer Decision Processing is still an emerging field of cognitive science.

There is no point in rewarding a company, you should be rewarding the person within the company who makes the choice to buy from you. Rewarding customer loyalty involves engaging individuals.