When I was studying computer science, motivation felt simple. You either care enough to solve the problem or you don’t. The system gives you feedback, the code either runs or it doesn’t, and progress is measurable. Later, when I started working in teams, nonprofits, and startups, I learned you can’t “logic” people into being motivated.
My instinct is to break down the problem, explain the objective, and assume everyone will move in the same direction. I learned people don’t move because the objective is correct, they move when they feel like the work belongs to them, when they feel capable, and when they feel like they’re doing something that matters.
The fastest way to kill motivation is to make someone feel controlled. The fastest way to increase motivation is to give someone ownership. I’ve seen this in teams. The moment someone feels like they’re just executing someone else’s plan, their energy drops. This is why autonomy shows up in a lot of research and management writing, including Wharton School’s point that autonomy is a major driver of motivation and performance.
If the work is too big, too vague, or too uncertain, a lot of people freeze, including me. This is where my break it down approach is actually useful. When I take something overwhelming and turn it into smaller steps, I start moving again, not because I suddenly became more motivated, but because they I now see a path. This is also a big theme in Self-Determination Theory: people are more motivated when they feel autonomy and competence. This theory actually lays out the framework for understanding human motivation and its steps.
If you want to learn why people need autonomy read the Wharton School article, and if you like psychology like I do, read Self-Determination Theory by the APA that explains the three steps of motivation.
