★★★TED Lesson / Dan Pink on the surprising science of motivation, Lesson1 (ダニエル・ピンク 「やる気に関する驚きの科学」)

2012年08月05日 ★★★, business, science, TED.

TED Dan Pink : on the surprising science of motivation


About This Talk

Career analyst Dan Pink examines the puzzle of motivation, starting with a fact that social scientists know but most managers don’t: Traditional rewards aren’t always as effective as we think. Listen for illuminating stories — and maybe, a way forward.

*There is a word list below the script. The list includes blue colored words which are in the script.




MP3ファイル 音源であるmp3に直接リンクが貼られています。右クリックをしてファイルを保存してください。





Lesson1 Script (Video Time 00:00 ~ 05:08)

(1) I need to make a confession at the outset here. A little over 20 years ago I did something that I regret, something that I’m not particularly proud of, something that, in many ways, I wish no one would ever know, but here I feel kind of obliged to reveal. (Laughter) In the late 1980s, in a moment of youthful indiscretion, I went to law school. (Laughter)

(2) Now, in America law is a professional degree: you get your university degree, then you go on to law school. And when I got to law school, I didn’t do very well. To put it mildly, I didn’t do very well. I, in fact, graduated in the part of my law school class that made the top 90 percent possible. (Laughter) Thank you. I never practiced law a day in my life; I pretty much wasn’t allowed to. (Laughter)

(3) But today, against my better judgment, against the advice of my own wife, I want to try to dust off some of those legal skills – what’s left of those legal skills. I don’t want to tell you a story. I want to make a case. I want to make a hard-headed, evidence-based, dare I say lawyerly case, for rethinking how we run our businesses.

(4) So, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, take a look at this. This is called the candle problem. Some of you might have seen this before. It’s created in 1945 by a psychologist named Karl Duncker. Karl Duncker created this experiment that is used in a whole variety of experiments in behavioral science. And here’s how it works. Suppose I’m the experimenter. I bring you into a room. I give you a candle, some thumbtacks and some matches. And I say to you, “Your job is to attach the candle to the wall so the wax doesn’t drip onto the table.” Now what would you do?

(5) Now many people begin trying to thumbtack the candle to the wall. Doesn’t work. Somebody, some people — and I saw somebody kind of make the motion over here –some people have a great idea where they light the match, melt the side of the candle, try to adhere it to the wall. It’s an awesome idea. Doesn’t work. And eventually, after five or 10 minutes, most people figure out the solution, which you can see here. The key is to overcome what’s called functional fixedness. You look at that box and you see it only as a receptacle for the tacks. But it can also have this other function, as a platform for the candle. The candle problem.

(6) Now I want to tell you about an experiment using the candle problem, done by a scientist named Sam Glucksberg, who is now at Princeton University in the U.S. This shows the power of incentives. Here’s what he did. He gathered his participants. And he said, “I’m going to time you. How quickly you can solve this problem?” To one group he said, ”I’m going to time you to establish norms, averages for how long it typically takes someone to solve this sort of problem.”

(7) To the second group he offered rewards. He said, “If you’re in the top 25 percent of the fastest times, you get five dollars. If you’re the fastest of everyone we’re testing here today, you get 20 dollars.” Now this is several years ago. Adjusted for inflation, it’s a decent sum of money for a few minutes of work. It’s a nice motivator.

(8) Question: How much faster did this group solve the problem? Answer: It took them, on average, three and a half minutes longer. Three and a half minutes longer. Now this makes no sense right? I mean, I’m an American. I believe in free markets. That’s not how it’s supposed to work. Right? (Laughter) If you want people to perform better, you reward them. Right? Bonuses, commissions, their own reality show. Incentivize them. That’s how business works. But that’s not happening here. You’ve got an incentive designed to sharpen thinking and accelerate creativity, and it does just the opposite. It dulls thinking and blocks creativity.

(9) And what’s interesting about this experiment is that it’s not an aberration. This has been replicated over and over and over again, for nearly 40 years. These contingent motivators – if you do this, then you get that – work in some circumstances. But for a lot of tasks, they actually either don’t work or, often, they do harm. This is one of the most robust findings in social science, and also one of the most ignored.

To be continued to Lesson2.


Let’s talk about the article base on the questions below.

Viewpoints or discussion

  1. Do you agree on the speaker’s opinion?
  2. What kind of rewards do you have in your company?  Bonus, vacation, and so on.
  3. What kind of motivation that makes you work better?



(1) confession /kənˈfɛʃən/ noun, the act of telling people something that makes you embarrassed, ashamed, etc.

outset /ˈaʊtˌsɛt/ noun, the start or beginning of something

oblige /əˈblaɪʤ/ verb, to force or require (someone or something) to do something because of a law or rule or because it is necessary

reveal /rɪˈvi:l/ verb, to make (something) known

indiscretion /ˌɪndɪˈskrɛʃən/ noun, lack of good judgment or care in behavior and especially in speech : lack of discretion

(2) mild /ˈmajəld/ adjective, gentle in nature or behavior

pretty much, (informal) almost; almost completely:

(3) against one’s better judgment, idiom, if you do something against your better judgment, you do it although you think it is wrong

dust off idiom, to make something usable after it has not been used for a long time

hard-headed adjective, stubborn; willful

dare /ˈdeɚ/ verb, to have enough courage or confidence to do something : to not be too afraid to do something

(4) jury /ˈʤɚri/ noun, a group of people who are members of the public and are chosen to make a decision in a legal case

experiment /ɪkˈsperəmənt/ noun, a scientific test in which you perform a series of actions and carefully observe their effects in order to learn about something

behavioral science, scientific term, A scientific discipline, such as sociology, anthropology, or psychology, in which the actions and reactions of humans and animals are studied through observational and experimental methods.

thumbtack /ˈθʌmˌtæk/ noun, a short pin that has a large, flat head and that is used to attach papers, pictures, etc., to a wall or bulletin board

wax /wæks/ n [U] a solid substance made of fat or oil and used to make CANDLEs, POLISH etc:

(5) adhere /ædˈhiɚ/ verb, to stick to something : to attach firmly to something

functional fixedness, scientific term, when something is thought of only in terms of its functionality, then the person is demonstrating functional fixedness. This type of thinking is narrow and limited, often inhibiting the problem solving process.

receptacle /rɪˈsɛptɪkəl/ noun, a container that is used to hold something

platform /ˈplætˌfoɚm/ noun, a flat surface that is raised higher than the floor or ground and that people stand on when performing or speaking

(6) incentive /ɪnˈsɛntɪv/ noun, something that encourages a person to do something or to work harder

time /taɪm/ verb ‣MEASURE TIME 2 to measure how long it takes for sth to happen or for sb to do sth:

norm /ˈnoɚm/ noun, standards of proper or acceptable behavior

(7) inflation  /ɪnˈfleɪʃən/ noun, a continual increase in the price of goods and services

decent /ˈdi:sn̩t/ adjective, good enough but not the best : adequate or acceptable

motivator, n [C] something or someone that makes you want to do or achieve something → incentive:

(8) free market economic term, a market where prices are determined by supply and demand

commission /kəˈmɪʃən/ noun, an amount of money paid to an employee for selling something

incentivize /ɪnˈsɛntɪvaiz/ verb, give or provide incentives

accelerate /ɪkˈsɛləˌreɪt/ verb, to cause (something) to happen sooner or more quickly

dull /dʌl/ verb ‣PERSON 2 [T] ~ sb to make a person slower or less lively:

(9) aberration /ˌæbəˈreɪʃən/ noun, something (such as a problem or a type of behavior) that is unusual or unexpected

replicate /ˈrɛpləˌkeɪt/ verb, to repeat or copy (something) exactly

contingent /kənˈtɪnʤənt/ adjective, depending on something else that might or might not happen

circumstance /ˈsɚkəmˌstæns/ noun, a condition or fact that affects a situation

robust /roʊˈbʌst/ adjective, successful or impressive and not likely to fail or weaken



(1)最初に告白させてください 20年ほど前にした あることを 私は後悔しています あまり自慢できないようなことを してしまいました 誰にも知られたくないと思うようなことです それでも明かさなければならないと感じています (ざわざわ) 1980年代の後半に 私は若気の至りから ロースクールに行ったのです (笑)

(2)アメリカでは 法律は専門職学位です まず大学を出て それからロースクールへ行きます ロースクールで私は あまり成績が芳しくありませんでした 控えめに言ってもあまり良くなく 上位90パーセント以内という成績で 卒業しました (笑) どうも 法律関係の仕事はしたことがありません やらせてもらえなかったというべきかも (笑)

(3)しかしながら今日は 良くないことだとは思いつつ 妻の忠告にも反しながら この法律のスキルを 再び引っ張り出すことにしました 今日はストーリーは語りません 主張を立証します 合理的で 証拠に基づいた 法廷におけるような論証で ビジネスのやり方を再考してみたいと思います

(4)陪審員の皆さん こちらをご覧ください これは「ロウソクの問題」と呼ばれるものです ご存じの方もいるかもしれません 1945年に カール ドゥンカーという心理学者が この実験を考案し 様々な行動科学の実験で用いました ご説明しましょう 私が実験者だとします 私はあなた方を部屋に入れて ロウソクと 画鋲と マッチを渡します そしてこう言います 「テーブルに蝋がたれないように ロウソクを壁に 取り付けてください」 あなたならどうしますか?

(5) 多くの人は 画鋲でロウソクを 壁に留めようとします でも うまくいきません あそこで 手真似をしている人がいましたが マッチの火でロウソクを溶かして 壁にくっつけるというアイデアを思いつく人もいます いいアイデアですが うまくいきません 5分か10分すると たいていの人は解決法を見つけますこのようにすればいいのです 鍵になるのは「機能的固着」を乗り越えるということです 最初あの箱を見て 単なる画鋲の入れ物だと思います しかしそれは別な使い方をすることもでき ロウソクの台になるのです これがロウソクの問題です

(6) 次にサム グラックスバーグという科学者が このロウソクの問題を使って行った 実験をご紹介します 彼は現在プリンストン大学にいます この実験でインセンティブの力がわかります 彼は参加者を集めて こう言いました 「この問題をどれくらい早く解けるか時計で計ります」 そして1つのグループには この種の問題を解くのに 一般にどれくらい時間がかかるのか 平均時間を知りたいのだと言います

(7) もう1つのグループには 報酬を提示します 「上位25パーセントの人には 5ドルお渡しします 1番になった人は 20ドルです」 これは何年も前の話なので 物価上昇を考慮に入れれば 数分の作業でもらえる金額としては 悪くありません 十分なモチベーションになります

(8) このグループはどれくらい早く 問題を解けたのでしょう? 答えは 平均で― 3分半 余計に時間がかかりました 3分半長くかかったのです そんなのおかしいですよね? 私はアメリカ人です 自由市場を信じています そんな風になるわけがありません (笑) 人々により良く働いてもらおうと思ったら 報酬を出せばいい ボーナスに コミッション あるいは何であれ― インセンティブを与えるのです ビジネスの世界ではそうやっています しかしここでは結果が違いました 思考が鋭くなり クリエイティビティが加速されるようにと インセンティブを用意したのに 結果は反対になりました 思考は鈍く クリエイティビティは阻害されたのです

(9) この実験が興味深いのは それが例外ではないということです この結果は何度も何度も 40年に渡って再現されてきたのです この成功報酬的な動機付け―If Then式に 「これをしたら これが貰える」というやり方は 状況によっては機能します しかし多くの作業ではうまくいかず 時には害にすらなります これは社会科学における 最も確固とした発見の1つです そして最も無視されている発見でもあります


Twitter公式アカウント @LR_STARS

Facebookページ ラングリッチ (Langrich)  公式ページ

Tags: , ,