|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> On Mon, 24 May 2010 07:14:08 +0200, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msn com> wrote:
>>
>> who was offered what? was everyone competing for top rewards? i don't
>> get it.
>
> The test was performed several times, each time with different levels of
> reward offered. The participants competing for big rewards did worse
> than those competing for small (or no) rewards.
>
> Admittedly, he does kind of confuse things in that video, especially
> with the drawings. Neeum Zawan linked to a better video, one that even
> has a citation for the experiment:
> http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
>
>
>
Okay I see. Well he still makes exactly the same reversal, just about
word for word. Again I still don't see a clear path from the experiment
as he describes it to a result that 'the greater the money, reward the
less the performance,' but I do believe the related idea that the more
you try to motivate with money for certain types of production, the
poorer the result may be.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |