Book Review
DRIVE: The Surprising Truth About
What Motivates Us
Daniel Pink. New York: Riverhead/Penguin, 2009 (pp. 242).
ISBN: 978-1-59448-884-9

Reviewed by Tim Murphey
Kanda University of International Studies
Daniel Pink, already a well-known New York Times bestselling author with
his Whole New Mind (2006), published Drive in 2009. I bought both soon after
they came out, but regretfully did not get around to reading them until recently.
After reading them, I quickly bought them in Japanese and gave copies to thehighest manager/mover of our university, which I deem a good investment foreverybody’s future. That’s how serious I am about these books.
Drive narrates an entertaining and insightful overview of our evolving
drives as humans, our resistance to change, and a glimpse at “the surprising
truth about what motivates us.” The Whole New Mind describes a social
anthropological and psycho-physiological turn to the right hemisphere inwhich we generally perceive the big pictures, recognize patterns, and are more
empathetic, in contrast to the detail-focus of the left hemisphere. Pink’s thesisis that the work of the left brain has become less important due to abundance,automation, and the out-sourcing to Asia of simple left-brain type jobs
(telephone call centers in India, for example). I will focus on Drive for now, butboth books are very much worth a read and very popular among progressive
business managers.
Drive is divided into three parts: A New Operating System, The Three72

DRIVE, OnCUE Journal, 6(1), pages 72-78

Elements, and The Type I (for intrinsic) Tool Kit. In Part One, the fourchapters present the analogy of computer operating systems to understandour Motivation Operating Systems. System 1.0 was originally our physiologicaldrives, then came the carrot and the stick (rewards and punishment) as system
2.0, which most of the world assumes we still use. But actually many humans
have moved on, and we need to update our understanding to the 3.0 systemthat really moves many of us, in which autonomy, mastery, and purpose are
more important to us.
Chapter 1 describes the rise and fall of rewards and punishment in system
2.0. Apparently, due to Abraham Maslow’s humanistic psychology (1954)
there was some effort in businesses to revise Motivation 2.0, but according
to Pink it only improved to 2.1 (p. 20). It was modest. But now he thinks weneed a paradigm shift, or in his words it is time for “a full-scale upgrade” toMotivation 3.0 that many OECD countries are partially realizing already.
Chapter 2 looks at seven reasons that carrots and sticks (often) don’t workand can sometimes “achieve precisely the opposite of their intended aims” (p.
35); that is, as research shows, they can transform an “interesting task into adrudge. They can turn play into work. And by diminishing intrinsic motivation
they can send performance, creativity, and even upstanding behavior toppling
like dominoes” (p. 37). Pink’s recap at the end of the chapter summarizes these´VHYHQ GHDGO\ ÁDZVµ VD\LQJ WKDW FDUURWV DQG VWLFNV FDQ H[WLQJXLVK LQWULQVLF
motivation; diminish performance; crush creativity; crowd out good behavior;encourage cheating, shortcuts, and unethical behavior; become addictive; andfoster short term thinking (p. 59)—much of what one might say is wrong
with the present education systems dominant in many countries. These arecertainly not new ideas to de-motivation researchers in Japan, but they add
research evidence culled from other shores to condemn the sterile testing,learning, and working environments that many of our students experience.
While businesses here are crying out for creativity in the workplace, they also
still seem to want mostly inexperienced workers who have not studied abroad
and who are fresh and malleable meat for the grinder to shape as required.
As Pink notes in Chapter 2A, Motivation 2.0 still works in some cases73Murphey

when we are doing mechanical tasks that require little thinking and creativity
and are not intrinsically motivating. If at all possible, though, we should try toincrease the task’s challenge or variety, make it less routine, or connect it to alarger purpose, all of which would make it less mechanical. If these are notpossible, then use rewards, along with the following three strategies: 1) offer arationale for why the task is necessary, 2) acknowledge the task is boring, and3) allow people to complete the task their own way.
Chapter 3 introduces Type X and Type I, using the analogy many of you may
be familiar with—Type A and B personalities. (Type As are very competitiveand stressed-out over-achievers. Type Bs are relaxed and laid back. Type A
is a recipe for heart disease.) Pink describes Type X behavior as extrinsicallymotivated and Type I as intrinsically motivated. Type X behavior occurs inpeople who have been conditioned to respond mostly to carrots and sticks(for example, when you ask children if they want to play a game and they ask,
“What will you give me if I play?”, or when students ask, “Will this be on thetest?” they have been conditioned by external rewards; cf. Kohn, 1993). With
Type I behavior, people are more interested in the inherent satisfaction of theactivity itself. Pink insists that “Type I behavior is made, not born,” (p. 78)
and it “almost always out performs Type X’s in the long run” (p. 79). It doesnot “disdain money or recognition” (p. 79), but rather sees them as feedback
rather than goals. “Type I behavior is a renewable resource” and “promotes
greater physical and mental well-being” (p. 80). Pink summarizes by saying,“Ultimately, Type I behavior depends on three nutrients: autonomy, mastery,and purpose. Type I behavior is self-directed. It is devoted to becoming betterand better at something that matters. And it connects that quest for excellence
to a larger purpose.” (pp. 80-81)
As Pink notes:
Some people might dismiss notions like these as gooey and idealistic, but
WKHVFLHQFHVD\VRWKHUZLVH7KHVFLHQFHFRQÀUPVWKDWWKLVVRUWRI EHKDYLRU
is essential to being human—and that now, in a rapidly changing economy,
it is also critical for professional, personal, and organizational success ofany kind. (p. 81)
74

DRIVE, OnCUE Journal, 6(1), pages 72-78

Then he says we have a choice; we can cling to an old view of carrots
DQG VWLFNV RU OLVWHQ WR WKH UHVHDUFK DQG SXOO RXUVHOYHV ´LQWR WKH WZHQW\ÀUVW
century, and craft a new operating system to help ourselves, our companies,and our world work a little better” (p. 81). Businesses should encourage
WKLV ÀUVW WR EH GRQH LQ VFKRROV VR LW ZRXOG EH HDV\ WR FRQWLQXH ZLWK LQ WKH
workplace. In Japan, revising the job recruitment system is an obvious stepin the right direction, however we are going against the grain of tradition andconvention that implicitly holds that the main job of university education is
not education but placing students securely in a job. See this YouTube video(The Real Voice of Japanese Students 2: GO STUDY ABROAD!) about study
abroad to get a clearer picture of the situation: http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=C9CYaUhqEdw.
Part Two delves into the three “nutrients”: autonomy, mastery andpurpose. In the autonomy chapter, Pink describes companies’ success withROWE (results-only work environment) in which workers show up when theywant and stay as long as they want to get their jobs done well. In such anenvironment management is less about making sure people are in their places
and more about creating conditions for people to do their best work—and thisis augmented by their autonomy. Pink quotes CEO Jeff Gunther at Meddius assaying, “My dad’s generation views human beings as human resources… For
me, it’s partnership between me and the employees. They are not resources.
They’re partners.” (pp. 87-88)
Pink is critical of “management” which he says has not changed much in ahundred years. He says, “Its central ethic remains control; its chief tools remain
extrinsic motivators. That leaves it largely out of sync with the non-routine,
right-brain abilities on which many of the world’s economies now depend” (p.
88). He explains that “if at age fourteen or forty-three, we’re passive and inert,
WKDW·VQRWEHFDXVHLW·VRXUQDWXUH,W·VEHFDXVHVRPHWKLQJÁLSSHGRXUGHIDXOW
setting” (p. 89). Pink bases much of his argument on Deci and Ryan’s (2006)
well-researched Self Determination Theory and the subsequent research inbusinesses:…researchers at Cornell University studied 320 small businesses, half of75

Murphey

which granted workers autonomy, the other half relying on top-down
direction. The businesses that offered autonomy grew at four times theUDWHRI WKHFRQWURORUGHUHGÀUPVDQGKDGRQHWKLUGWKHWXUQRYHU S The second half of the chapter deals with four essentials of autonomy, that is,
control over task, time, technique, and team. When people experience these,
they are more motivated and do better work.
“Mastery” is somewhat of a misnomer for me. What Pink describes isseeking mastery and enjoying the challenge of continual improvement. Thereis no end point at which we have become the best possible. There is always
more we can do. The magic is in the challenge.
When writing of purpose, Pink paints an even better altruistic picturesaying,Autonomous people working toward mastery perform at very high levels.
But those who do so in the service of some greater objective can achieveeven more. The most deeply motivated people, not to mention those who
DUHPRVWSURGXFWLYHDQGVDWLVÀHGKLWFKWKHLUGHVLUHVWRDFDXVHODUJHUWKDQ
themselves. (p. 133)
Here he notes how research is showing staggering levels of worker
disengagement (due to over-managing) and, at the same time, an equally
sharp rise in volunteerism. “These diverging lines—compensated engagement
going down, uncompensated effort going up—suggest that volunteer work is
nourishing people in ways that paid work simply is not” (p. 134). Pink tells thestory that after the economy crash in 2009 some second-year Harvard MBA
students decided they needed a Hippocratic oath for business grads aimed at
helping the world, rather than just their pockets. Max Anderson, one of thestudent founders, said,
My hope is that at our 25th reunion our class will not be known for howmuch money we made or how much money we gave back to the school,
but for how the world was a better place as a result of our leadership. (p.
138)
3LQNHQGV&KDSWHUVWUHVVLQJWKHLPSRUWDQFHRI SXUSRVHRYHUSURÀW2QH
ZD\RI ORRNLQJDWHPSOR\HHSXUSRVHIXODIÀOLDWLRQLVWKHZD\WKH\XVHZRUGV
76

DRIVE, OnCUE Journal, 6(1), pages 72-78

when they talk of the company in “we” terms or “they” terms, for example. As
a humanistic writer conscious of the power of words, he writes, “Humanize
what people say and you may well humanize what they do” (p. 139). Purpose
can also be seen in how companies altruistically give back to society andwhether workers have some say in what charities they give to.
The conundrum of satisfaction, as related in interviews with Deci andRyan, is that “satisfaction depends not merely on having goals, but on having
WKH ULJKW JRDOVµ S   KDYLQJ PHUH SURÀW JRDOV ´FDQ OHDG VHQVLEOH SHRSOH
down self-destructive paths” (p. 143).
Part Three contains “The Type I Toolkit” which acts as a pragmatic
workbook for those seeking to change things through immediately taking
actions. It starts out with the “Nine strategies for awakening your motivation”,´1LQH ZD\V WR LPSURYH \RXU FRPSDQ\ RIÀFH RU JURXSµ DQG ´7KH ]HQ RI compensation.” He goes on to suggest to us “Paying people the type I way”,“Nine ideas for helping our kids”, “Fifteen essential books”, and “Six businessgurus who get it.” And he ends this part by describing “Four tips for getting
and staying motivated to exercise”, “The recap”, “The glossary”, and “Twenty
conversation starters to keep you thinking and talking.”“The central idea of the book is the mismatch between what science knows
and what business does,” (p. 145) which could easily be applied to educationand other areas of our lives. While Pink cites most of the well-read books inmy personal library (and many more), he does it with a unifying panoramicview that connects them well. While his metaphor of the computer operating
system may make some humanists cringe with comparing ourselves once again
to computers, it is a light-hearted analogy that actually works well, and implies
WKDWZKLOHZHLQÁXHQFHRWKHUVWRDJUHDWH[WHQWLWLV´ZHµZKRFRQWUROWKH
system upgrades or not. And while we can make incremental changes, we arealso able to change complete systems at times.
I personally think Pink could have built more explicitly on Maslow’shierarchy to help readers grasp more (my learning style preference for diagrams,perhaps). There is also the social question of bringing the third world up toaltruistic purposefulness. Last year, in Indonesia I had a breakfast conversation
77

Murpheywith a UN forestry administrator who was trying to persuade the government,
unsuccessfully, to cut back on its CO2 emissions. He made me think of whole
cultures within the lower levels of Maslow’s hierarchy that are still concerned
ZLWKGD\WRGD\VXUYLYDOUDWKHUWKDQPHDQLQJIXOVHOIIXOÀOOPHQW3HUKDSVWKH
most meaningful thing we can do, once we are attracted to meaningfulness, isto help others less fortunate than ourselves to escape from the lower levels ofsurvival and basic needs, to lead more meaningful purposeful lives themselves(see Hans Rosling’s recorded presentation on TED.com on this). This is what
we might call “altruistic agency.”
Received: September 14, 2011
Accepted: May 1, 2012
References
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). 2002. The handbook of self-determination
research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Hans Rosling on global population growth. Filmed June 2010, Posted July2010 on TED.com. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/hans_rosling_
on_global_population_growth.html
Kohn, A. (1993) Punished by rewards%RVWRQ0$+RXJKWRQ0LIÁLQ
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality (third ed.). New York, NY:
Harper and Row.
Pink, D. (2006). A whole new mind. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

78