Motivation
Recently I told a group of high school students at a local Career Day, "Healthcare is the most rewarding profession you can choose. You are
really helping people. And that feels good."
It was the best I could come up with before a group raised on flashy gadgets, fast food and endless choice. I thought it a good answer until I wondered aloud why I had known lab techs who became nurses but never the reverse. The teacher in the room had the answer. She said, "It's the money."
What motivates us? Are laboratory workers motivated because of job security, a love of science or job satisfaction? Surely, it isn't money.
We place a higher value on intrinsic motivators--love of knowledge, altruism, et al--and typically think of them as morally superior to working for money or ego. But as this article in Science Daily points out, intrinsic motivation may not exist. According to Steven Reiss, a professor of psychology at Ohio University, Athens, there is no proof "quality of happiness" suffers from "inferior" motivators. Indeed, any motivation is probably good enough.
Is greed (working just for the money) bad if patients receive excellent care? Is competition (openly wanting to do better than another department) terrible if it encourages overall improvement? And is hubris (broadcasting accomplishments) awful if it allows everyone the freedom to share success?
Thinking intent (working for a love of the job) and behavior (quality work) are connected is a trap. Intent and behavior are different. Management can assume employees must love their jobs to the point of personally sharing the values of the organization. Staff may think less of themselves if they don't. But noble aspirations matter little to a patient--the best care does.
So, does it matter what motivates us? For me, yes. A part of me believes wholeheartedly what I told those high school students. Most days, it feels really good to help people.