Humans Aren’t Pigeons, and There Are Only So Many Things You Can Drive

Can leaders drive results? Drive growth and profits? Drive worker motivation and employee engagement?

I think not. You can drive cattle or golf balls. But driving people for results, performance or happiness only drives them crazy. Nevertheless, drive theory was one of the most popular motivational theories of the last 70 years.

Drive theory, influenced by studying animals, says that people are motivated (or driven) by an instinctive need to get what they don’t have. As an example, here is a video where famous Harvard psychology professor B.F. Skinner explains how to motivate pigeons.

So, I guess I should add “drive pigeons” to my list of things I can drive.

Unfortunately, while drive theory really is easy to understand, people are not animals or golf balls. So, basing your employee engagement strategies on drive theory is an almost sure loser.

Yes, pigeons may respond as desired to get a treat. However, that rationale often does not work to motivate adults. Yes, adults will take the treat, money, award, plaque, T-shirt and the trips. But the only correlation between those incentives and performance is a negative one.

Improving employee engagement takes more than a T-shirt.

Unfortunately, many leaders seem to be using drive theory to drive people back to the office. Return-to-office mandates have made plenty of headlines lately. The debate about flexible work arrangements and motivation rages on.

Whose Perspective Matters in the Return-to-Office Debate

Many thought leaders complicate this debate by adopting positions without being clear:

1.  Are we most interested in the view of the worker or the view of the boss?

2.  For the workers involved, what level of experience do they have?

3.  What measures do leaders use to determine the right path?

I have spent much of the last five years thinking and researching these three questions.

Like many things, the right path depends upon your organization’s circumstances. Sometimes, the correct answer is 100% work from home (WFH) or 100% return to the office. For many other companies, the right path can spring from any one of hundreds of hybrid options. So, let me try to add some clarity to the three-question debate.

How Experience Shapes the Flexible Work Equation

The answer to the first question is straightforward. Many stories about return-to-office mandates take the view of the boss.

Yet this view has little value. Today, workers have choices, so their view is paramount. Not paying attention to your employees’ view could chase your best team members over to greener, more flexible pastures.

For the second question, in general, more experienced workers need less office time. But again, it depends. The type of work, the evolving work environment and the work’s level of digitization all have major impacts on flexible work arrangements.

Do you have many highly experienced employees who work mostly alone in jobs with high levels of digitization? They do not need to spend much time in the office. They have plenty of employee experience, knowledge about company culture and the intrinsic motivation to perform.

Their polar opposite involves new hires with little experience, a very collaborative assignment and a low level of digitization. They should probably spend a lot of time in the office. They need development opportunities and employee recognition.

The third question is one where the answers are the weakest. A lot of research uses the metric “hours worked per day” to determine productivity. Unfortunately, this measure relates little to what is actually important about employee performance.

Employee output is a better answer to productivity. But even this can be difficult to measure.

So, in my mind, the correct measure should be worker motivation. The more motivated the worker, the better the productivity, the better their employee engagement. A firm with highly motivated workers will outperform firms with a poorly motivated workforce.

That means uncovering the mysteries of employee motivation provides the key to whatever working arrangements you choose.

So, let’s take a trip through the history of worker motivation and corresponding theories.

Early Theories on Worker Motivation (1900s-1940s)

The foundation of worker motivation theory began with Frederick Taylor’s scientific management, which emphasized efficiency and productivity. Taylor believed that standardized work processes and performance-based rewards could motivate workers. By breaking tasks into smaller, specialized components and linking pay to output, he sought to maximize productivity while minimizing inefficiencies.

Though criticized for treating workers as mere cogs in a machine, his ideas laid the groundwork for modern management practices. His research also is the foundation for the field of industrial engineering. (I have a B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. in industrial engineering, all from Purdue.)

Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne Studies shifted the worker motivation focus from mechanical efficiency to human factors. His research revealed that beyond financial incentives, social interactions and attention from management played their part in employee motivation and productivity.

Employees who felt valued and engaged in a supportive environment produced more, highlighting the importance of psychological and social elements in the workplace.

Mid-20th Century Theories (1940s-1970s)

Abraham Maslow introduced the hierarchy of needs, a framework suggesting that human motivation follows a structured progression.

At the base are physiological needs, such as food and shelter. These are followed by safety, a sense of belonging and esteem, culminating in self-actualization. Maslow said that these needs, progressing from basic survival to personal growth and fulfillment, motivate workers.

Frederick Herzberg’s two-factor theory distinguished between workplace hygiene factors and motivators. Hygiene factors, such as salary, working conditions and company policies, prevent dissatisfaction but do not inherently drive motivation. In contrast, motivators like achievement, recognition and personal growth foster job satisfaction and encourage higher performance.

His theory highlighted the importance of meaningful work and the satisfaction derived from it.

Douglas McGregor introduced theory X and theory Y, contrasting two distinct managerial beliefs about employees. Theory X assumes that workers are inherently lazy and require strict supervision, while theory Y suggests that employees are naturally self-motivated and seek responsibility. McGregor’s work influenced modern leadership styles, encouraging managers to adopt more participatory and empowering approaches.

David McClelland’s theory of needs identified three key motivational drivers: achievement, power and affiliation. He argued that individuals are motivated differently based on their dominant need. Some thrive on accomplishing goals, others on exerting influence and some on building strong social connections. This theory became instrumental in understanding workplace dynamics and leadership development.

Late 20th Century Theories (1980s-2000s)

Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory proposed that motivation is based on the expectation of outcomes. Employees are driven by their belief that effort will lead to performance, performance will lead to rewards and the rewards will be valuable. This model highlights the importance of clear goals, fair compensation and aligning rewards with individual aspirations.

John Adams’ equity theory emphasized fairness in motivation. He suggested that employees compare their input-output ratios to those of their peers. Workers who perceive inequity may lose motivation or seek to restore balance through various means. They could reduce effort or demand higher compensation.

Both affect business outcomes. This theory underscores the psychological impact of perceived fairness in the workplace.

Edward Deci and Richard Ryan’s self-determination theory focused on intrinsic motivation and identified three psychological needs: autonomy, competence and relatedness. Employees who feel a sense of control, mastery and connection with others are more engaged and motivated. Deci and Ryan’s work demonstrated that intrinsic motivation often leads to greater job satisfaction and long-term performance.

Modern Theories (2000s-Present)

Edwin Locke and Gary Latham’s goal-setting theory argued that specific and challenging goals lead to higher performance when paired with feedback. Give employees clear objectives and constructive input on their progress, and you motivate them more. This theory has been widely applied in performance management and organizational behavior.

J. Richard Hackman’s and Greg R. Oldham’s job characteristics model proposed that five core job dimensions – skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback – shape motivation and job satisfaction. In their view, job design provided the crux of worker motivation. Leaders who design jobs that are meaningful, provide ownership and offer continuous learning are rewarded with better employee engagement and productivity.

Positive psychology and well-being theories highlight the role of emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning and accomplishment (PERMA) in motivation. By fostering a positive work environment, organizations can enhance employee well-being, creativity and long-term commitment.

Agile and lean practices emphasize continuous improvement, collaboration and employee empowerment. By integrating flexibility and responsiveness into workplace culture, organizations can harness motivation and innovation, particularly in fast-changing industries.

Recent Developments and a Reach for Higher Performance

The growing focus on work-life balance and remote work recognizes the need for flexibility in modern workplaces. Employees are more motivated when they have control over their schedules and a balance between professional and personal life. Remote work has reshaped traditional motivation strategies, emphasizing autonomy and results over rigid structures.

Technology and automation have transformed motivation by requiring workers to upskill and adapt to evolving job roles. While automation replaces repetitive tasks, it also lets employees engage in more meaningful and strategic work. Organizations that invest in learning and development create a culture of continuous growth, fostering long-term motivation. That can be a path to high performance.

For People, the Pigeon Paradigm Does Not Fly

My view of the 2025 worker motivation model is based on the book by Susan Fowler: Why Motivating People Doesn’t Work and What Does.

The book begins by describing how psychologists decided to study animals to better understand human motivation. This ties back to the work referenced earlier in the blog, where B.F. Skinner demonstrated the power of motivating pigeons with food pellets. As Fowler concluded in her book: “It is fascinating to watch as Professor Skinner rewards pigeons for doing what he wants the pigeons to do. He can get the pigeons to do almost anything.”

This pigeon paradigm was the basis for understanding human motivation for many years. In fact, many organizations still believe their employees are motivated just like the pigeons. I do not want to be too hard on these folks. Again, to be totally candid, I began pursuing this research as an attempt to find the perfect work-from-home food pellets. Because of all the various working arrangements available today, work from home is my favorite.

However, since the 1960s, significant research has resulted in the obvious conclusion that people are different from pigeons. It takes just a few “human nature stories” to determine that the pigeon paradigm, while interesting, has very little to do with motivating people.

How Toddlers Give Us Clues to Adult Motivation

In fact, we can look at how toddlers behave as they are growing up to clue us in about what motivates people – naturally. Consider these three:

1. What happens when you feed a baby? What does the baby do as you bring a spoonful of food to their mouth? The baby grabs the spoon because babies want to do it themselves. Babies want to control what food goes into their mouths. Despite not having the skill to feed themselves, it’s human nature for babies to want to control the situation.
2. What do toddlers do when they are talking to you, and you aren’t looking at the child? It’s human nature for toddlers to grab your face in their tiny hands and turn it in their direction, forcing you to look into their eyes. The toddler’s human nature wants to connect with you.
3. Do you ever delight in watching infants learn to walk? What do you notice? They fall a lot. You never question why they fall because they are learning. But have you ever questioned why they get back up? Why are they smiling and giggling instead of crying when they pull themselves up to try again? Because it is their human nature to find joy in learning and growing. Gaining mastery over the ability to walk is motivation enough.

These depictions of human nature explain the essence of motivation. What motivates people? As depicted above, three things:

• Having control
• Being connected
• Learning and growing

Let’s examine in detail how these three factors motivate people in an era of unparalleled flexibility in working arrangements.

People Want to Have Control

People do not want to be fed. They do not want to be told what to do. Instead, they want autonomy.

For people to maximize their contribution to work, they need to make their own choices. Of course, the ultimate control for an experienced worker is to work remotely the majority of the time. Although, depending upon the circumstances, even experienced workers may need to pop into the office to make sure workers stay aligned and connected.

In this way the worker decides where they work, when they work, when they take breaks, when they interface with co-workers and even what they wear while they work. Depending upon the specific work that is being done, remote work benefits include:

• Greater flexibility in managing their work-life balance. This can lead to higher job satisfaction and motivation as employees can better accommodate personal and family needs.
• A greater sense of autonomy. A remote or hybrid model can enhance intrinsic motivation as employees feel more in control of their work environment and schedule.
• Eliminating or reducing the daily commute can decrease stress and increase overall well-being, contributing to higher motivation levels.
• Lower turnover rates and higher job satisfaction. As it turns out, employees appreciate flexibility and balance.

People Want to Be Connected

People have a psychological need for a sense of belonging and connection to others. This human nature wants connections without concerns about ulterior motives. This human nature wants connections that align with our goals, values and actions to achieve a shared sense of purpose and contribute to something greater than ourselves.

Connectivity is a double-edged sword when it comes to remote work. Yes, working from home can help you connect better with your family.

Unless, of course, you never leave your keyboard and ignore your family. Or if you’re single, live alone and don’t go out much. Those scenarios and other remote working situations can result in miserable connectivity. Challenges include:

• Feelings of isolation and a lack of social interaction. These can torpedo motivation and engagement.
• Effective communication. Poor communication can create misunderstandings and decrease collaboration.
• The blurring of work-life boundaries. This can lead to burnout if employees struggle to disconnect from work. Again, this can torpedo motivation.
• Ensuring equal access to opportunities, resources and recognition. It’s easy to forget remote workers in favor of people who work down the hall.

People Want to Learn and Grow

We all have a psychological need to expand our ability to handle different situations, to enhance our skills over time and feel a sense of growing and flourishing.

From a leadership perspective, making sure your people learn and grow can be challenging. That’s regardless of whether your office is remote, hybrid or in person. The following strategies can enhance worker motivation in any situation:

• Managers should check in regularly with employees. And yes, you do have to make an extra effort for those who are working remotely. Zoom and old-fashioned phone calls are your friends here.
• Encouraging virtual social interactions and team-building activities can help mitigate feelings of isolation.
• Establishing clear communication channels and expectations can help reduce misunderstandings and improve collaboration.
• Encouraging employees to set boundaries and take breaks can help prevent burnout and maintain motivation.

Rethinking Worker Motivation in a Flexible World

The debate over worker motivation and flexible work is about understanding human nature – and your employees. Rigid policies and outdated, even evolving, management theories cannot rescue you.

Today’s leaders must recognize that people thrive when they have autonomy, feel connected and see opportunities for growth. You must figure out how to create an environment that fosters motivation, engagement and long-term success.

And there’s no universal answer.

Whether you’re implementing new motivation strategies, rethinking office policies or exploring hybrid models, let’s connect. Every organization is different, and understanding the nuances of motivation can make all the difference in shaping a productive and engaged workforce.

Together, we can figure out how to drive motivation, not people.

Related Reading

• Employee Engagement: The ‘Experts’ Are Wrong Again
• Make Your Company Greater – Hire Older Workers
• Starbucks’ RTO Mandate? Not that Bad …