I’d heard this before on management websites in the past and the other night I got into a heated discussion with another middle manager about this very topic.
I think it is complete and utter bullshit to say that giving people more money doesn’t motivate them. My friend said it’s true…people don’t work harder. This is what’s taught to MBAs, PMPs, etc
He cited two reasons:
-
People will be initially pleased, happy, motivated upon first receiving the salary increase, then will quickly acclimate and return to the previous productivity level.
-
Economist did a study a few years back saying that people’s happiness levels stay the same above $75k a year. Adjusting for inflation, let’s call it $100k. So, they’re saying the people making $100k are just as happy as the people making $300k or higher. So, no real reason to motivate past that level.
I find both of these reasons to be false and generally horseshit. BUT, I’d like to know what is the real story here. It seems obvious that people would be more happy if they weren’t as squeezed financially or if they were properly incentivized with money, bonuses, educational opportunities, or good amenities.
Why does it seem that no matter the education level, field, geographic location, etc, all director and executive level management believe that more money won’t make their workers more productive?
If I received a 10% raise every year, I know I’d be more motivated to work harder, add more value, and contribute more. Instead I feel everyone I come across has basically given up and is ‘quiet quitting’ or doing the bare minimum or says things like ‘it’s just a job’.
I sure AF would be happier making more year over year and would be more willing to go above and beyond for an employer who understands that.
Any insight into this would be appreciated.