Most leaders today talk about motivation as if it were obvious: you set targets, attach rewards, maybe add pressure, and magically people perform. But the idea that humans do great work because they want to, not because they’re pushed or paid, is surprisingly new. And it didn’t come from management theory. It came from a series of weird psychological experiments that almost didn’t happen.

The story of intrinsic motivation starts long before anyone had a name for it – and its lessons hit painfully close to home for anyone leading teams today.

When Behaviorism Ruled the World

For decades, psychology was obsessed with a simple formula:
Reward → Behavior.
Punishment → Less Behavior.

Humans, in this view, weren’t much different from lab rats. If you dangled the right incentive, the right compliance would follow. This mindset seeped into business, education, parenting — everything.

And then reality intruded.

Harlow’s Accidental Breakthrough (1950)

In 1950, Harry Harlow – already known for his attachment studies – gave monkeys mechanical puzzles. Simple devices the monkeys could manipulate and solve.

But here’s the twist: there was no reward.
No food. No treats. No reason – according to the dominant theory – for them to touch the puzzle at all.

Yet the monkeys:

• played with the puzzles,
• solved them,
• got better over time.

They acted like they enjoyed it.

When Harlow later introduced food rewards, performance actually got worse. Interest dropped. Mistakes increased. The external reward somehow interfered with whatever inner drive had been there before.

Harlow wrote that the monkeys seemed motivated by the activity itself — a shocking claim at the time. He even called it “intrinsic reward.”
But the field largely ignored him. This wasn’t supposed to happen, so most people acted like it didn’t.

White’s Theory of Competence (1959)

A few years later, Robert White published a landmark paper arguing that humans have a basic need to feel effective — to handle challenges, master tasks, and shape their environment. He called this “effectance motivation.”

His point was simple but radical:
People don’t act just to gain pleasure or avoid pain. They act to feel competent.

White didn’t run the famous experiment, but he gave language to something everyone intuitively knows:
That feeling of “I can do this” is a powerful driver. Sometimes more powerful than any external payoff.

This set the stage for the experiment that truly broke behaviorism open.

Deci and the Soma Puzzle Experiment (1971)

When people talk about the origin of intrinsic motivation research, they usually mean Edward Deci’s Soma puzzle study from 1971. If the Harlow experiment cracks open the door, Deci kicks it wide open.

The Setup

Deci recruited students and gave them Soma puzzles — seven wooden pieces that can be arranged into dozens of shapes. They’re interesting, challenging, even addictive. Perfectly suited for people to get lost in.

The study ran for three sessions across three days.

Two groups:

1. Control group — never paid.
2. Experimental group — paid money only on day two.

A key part of each session was the “free-choice period.” The experimenter left the room, supposedly to “score” solutions, and told students they could do whatever they liked. On the table: puzzles, magazines, random objects.

What Deci was secretly measuring was:
How much time do they voluntarily spend with the puzzles when nobody is watching?

This free-choice time became the measure of intrinsic motivation.

The Punchline

On day two, the experimental group was paid for every puzzle solved. And yes — they worked harder.

But on day three, when payment stopped, something dramatic happened:

They voluntarily spent less time playing with the puzzles than:

• They did on day one, and
• The control group, which had never been paid.

Being rewarded had changed the meaning of the activity.
In Deci’s words, when rewards are used to control behavior, they can “undermine intrinsic motivation.”

For the first time, we had clear human evidence that rewards don’t just motivate. They also demotivate — if they replace the sense of autonomy and interest that was already there.

---

Kids, Crayons, and the Overjustification Effect (1973)

To see if this effect applied to children, Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett ran a similar study in 1973. Preschool kids who loved drawing were divided into three groups:

1. Expected reward (“If you draw, you get a certificate.”)
2. Unexpected reward (They drew, then got a surprise certificate.)
3. No reward.

Later, when kids were left alone during free play, the result was unmistakable:

The kids who expected a reward now spent less time drawing for fun.
Their internal motivation had been replaced with an external reason. And once that reason disappeared, so did the interest.

This became known as the overjustification effect:
When you add an external “justification” for something people already enjoy, the inner drive weakens.

---

Self-Determination Theory Emerges

Deci later teamed up with Richard Ryan to turn all of this into a framework: Self-Determination Theory (SDT).

SDT says intrinsic motivation thrives when three basic psychological needs are met:

• Autonomy — I choose how to do it.
• Competence — I feel capable and improving.
• Relatedness — I feel connected to others and the purpose.

The early experiments are now classic illustrations of what happens when these needs are supported — or violated.

---

Where Business Still Gets It Wrong

And here’s where it gets uncomfortable for leaders.

Corporate life is built on rewards:

• Bonuses
• KPIs
• Performance ratings
• Promotions
• Incentive schemes
• Stretch targets

But the early research shows a clear pattern:

Rewards can increase performance in the short term —
but they often reduce the very motivation you need in the long term.

If people already enjoy the work (learning, problem-solving, building, creating), adding controlling rewards can turn that joy into compliance. The story in their head shifts from:

“I’m doing this because it’s interesting,”
to
“I’m doing this because I have to.”

And once that inner spark is gone, it’s very hard to reignite.

The tragedy?
Most people start their careers intrinsically motivated.
They enter as curious human beings… and leave as bonus-chasing zombies.

Not because they changed.
But because the system taught them to.

That’s why a hard-wired reward system is one of the most expensive mistakes in modern management.

---

What Effective Leaders Understand

The leaders who get this don’t fight human nature.
They work with it.

The leaders who get this don’t fight human nature
They work with it.

They create environments where intrinsic motivation can breathe:

• They give people autonomy over how they work.
• They don’t treat rewards as leashes.
• They provide challenges people can actually grow with.
• They offer feedback that builds competence instead of anxiety
• They protect teams from pointless pressure and politics.
• They connect the work to a purpose that actually matters.

They’ve learned the hard lesson that the science teaches us:

If you want high performance, stop bribing and threatening people.
Start designing conditions where they want to give their best.

Intrinsic motivation isn’t a fluffy concept.
It’s a biological, psychological, and performance reality.
And ignoring it is one of the most expensive mistakes in modern organizations.

---

If you want your leaders to build environments where intrinsic motivation actually thrives, let’s talk. We help organizations grow leaders who know how to create conditions for real performance, not just compliance.

---

FAQ: Intrinsic Motivation, SDT, and Leadership

What is intrinsic motivation?
Intrinsic motivation is the drive to do something because the activity itself is interesting, enjoyable, or meaningful — not because of external rewards or pressure.

What is Self-Determination Theory (SDT)?
Self-Determination Theory is a long-standing psychological theory by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan. It explains how motivation and wellbeing depend on three basic needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

How is intrinsic motivation different from extrinsic motivation?
Intrinsic motivation comes from within: curiosity, interest, purpose, mastery. Extrinsic motivation comes from outside: money, bonuses, grades, pressure, threats.

Do rewards always kill intrinsic motivation?
No. Rewards are not “evil” by default. Research shows that controlling, expected, “do this and you’ll get that” rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation for activities people already enjoy.

Why is intrinsic motivation so important for agile teams?
Agile teams rely on creativity, ownership, learning, and collaboration — all powered by intrinsic motivation.

What can leaders do tomorrow to support intrinsic motivation?
Give teams more say in how they work. Reduce unnecessary control and reporting. Offer feedback that helps people grow. Make it safe to experiment and learn.

---

Read on the blog →