wondelai/skills

drive-motivation

Design motivation systems using Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose (AMP) for products and teams.

ソースを見る
リポジトリの原文

見出し、例、コード、表、リンク、参照画像を含む原文を表示しています。

Drive Motivation Framework

Design motivation systems for products, teams, and organizations using the science of intrinsic motivation.

Core Principle

The secret to high performance isn't rewards and punishment — it's the deeply human need to direct our own lives, learn and create new things, and do better for ourselves and our world. For any task requiring even rudimentary cognitive effort, external rewards either don't work or actively worsen performance. Intrinsic motivation — Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose (AMP) — drives lasting engagement.

Scoring

Goal: 10/10. Score any motivation system (product features, team incentives, gamification, engagement loops) against the Quick Diagnostic: start at 5, add 1 for each of the first five rows answered "yes," then subtract 2 if the sixth row is also "yes" — an "if-then" reward doing the motivating crowds out the rest. Bands:

  • 9-10 — autonomy, mastery, and purpose all present; no if-then crowding-out.
  • 5-6 — one pillar carries the system; the other two are weak or extrinsic.
  • ≤3 — relies on rewards, mandates, or controlling behaviors; intrinsic motivation absent.

Always state the current score, which diagnostic rows failed, and the specific fixes to reach 10/10.

Motivation 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0

VersionCore AssumptionApproachEra
1.0Humans are biologicalSurvival drivesPre-industrial
2.0Humans respond to rewards/punishmentsCarrot and stickIndustrial age
3.0Humans seek autonomy, mastery, purposeIntrinsic motivationKnowledge economy

The Seven Deadly Flaws of Extrinsic Rewards

"If-then" rewards ("If you do X, then you get Y"):

FlawMechanismExample
1. Extinguish intrinsic motivationTurns play into workKids paid to draw stopped drawing when payments stopped
2. Diminish performanceNarrow focus, reduce creativityCandle problem: rewarded group performed worse
3. Crush creativityReward focus replaces explorationCommissioned art rated less creative
4. Crowd out good behaviorFinancial framing replaces moral framingDay-care late fee: lateness increased (became a "service")
5. Encourage cheatingGoal fixation invites shortcutsWells Fargo fake accounts
6. Become addictiveBigger rewards needed over timeLast year's bonus = this year's expectation
7. Foster short-term thinkingOptimize for the reward periodQuarterly bonuses → quarterly thinking

The boundary: extrinsic rewards work only for routine, algorithmic tasks with no intrinsic interest. For creative work, complex problem-solving, or long-term engagement, they backfire.

See references/extrinsic-rewards.md when a reward or incentive scheme is backfiring — the named studies behind each flaw and a decision rule for when rewards are safe to use.

The Three Pillars: Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose

1. Autonomy

Core concept: The desire to direct our own lives — choice over what, when, how, and with whom. Autonomy ≠ independence: people can act with choice while staying interdependent with a team.

The Four T's of Autonomy:

DimensionQuestionExample
TaskWhat do I work on?Google's 20% time, Atlassian ShipIt days
TimeWhen do I work?Flexible hours, no mandatory meetings
TechniqueHow do I do it?Choose tools, methods, approach
TeamWho do I work with?Self-forming teams

Product applications:

ContextAutonomy KillerAutonomy Enabler
OnboardingForced linear tutorialChoose your path, skip steps
ContentAlgorithm-only feedUser-controlled feeds, filters
WorkflowRigid process, feature bloatCustom automations, show/hide, progressive disclosure

Autonomy violations: "You must complete X before Y", unskippable tutorials, mandatory notifications, and forced single paths through the experience.

See references/autonomy.md when designing onboarding, feeds, or workflow controls — full Four T's patterns plus the autonomy audit checklist.

2. Mastery

Core concept: The desire to get better at something that matters. Mastery is a mindset, not a destination — it's asymptotic, and the joy is in the pursuit.

Three laws of mastery:

  • Mastery is a mindset — ability is developed, not fixed (Dweck's growth mindset). Frame failures as learning, not judgment.
  • Mastery is a pain — it demands effort and deliberate practice. Flow (Csikszentmihalyi) lives between boredom and anxiety, so calibrate challenge to skill level.
  • Mastery is asymptotic — users never fully arrive. Always offer a next level, next challenge.

Flow conditions: clear goals, immediate feedback, challenge/skill balance, sense of control.

Product applications:

ContextMastery DesignExample
ProgressVisible skill developmentGitHub contribution graph, Duolingo levels
DifficultyAdaptive challengeGames that adjust to player skill
FeedbackImmediate, clear signalsGrammarly real-time writing analysis

Mastery violations: flat difficulty that never adapts, and failure that is punished rather than framed as learning.

See references/mastery.md when designing progress, difficulty, or feedback systems — flow-state calibration, deliberate practice, and the mastery audit checklist.

3. Purpose

Core concept: The yearning to act in service of something larger than ourselves. Purpose is the context for the other two pillars — without it, autonomy is directionless and mastery hollow.

Three expressions of purpose:

ExpressionHow It ManifestsExample
GoalsPurpose-driven objectivesTOMS: every purchase helps a person in need
WordsLanguage of purpose, not profit"Associates" not "employees", "community" not "users"
PoliciesActions that demonstrate purposePatagonia: "Don't Buy This Jacket"

Product applications:

ContextPurpose DesignExample
ImpactShow the user's contributionWikipedia edit counter, Kiva lending impact
CommunityConnect to something biggerOpen source contributions, community goals
ValuesAlign product with beliefsEcosia: "Search the web to plant trees"

Purpose prescriptions: show aggregate impact ("Together, our users have saved 1M hours"), connect individual actions to collective outcomes, and celebrate meaningful milestones over vanity metrics.

See references/purpose.md when wiring impact, community, or values features — Goals/Words/Policies patterns and the purpose audit checklist.

AMP Applied: Product Design

Gamification Done Right vs. Wrong

PrincipleBad (Extrinsic)Good (Intrinsic)
AutonomyForced challenges, mandatory participationOpt-in, chosen challenges
MasteryPoints for everything, trivial badgesSkill-based progression, meaningful milestones
PurposePointless competition, discouraging leaderboardsCommunity contribution, personal growth

Example — Duolingo: autonomy (choose language, pace, topics), mastery (adaptive difficulty, skill levels), purpose ("learn a language to connect with people"). Caution: streaks can shift from intrinsic mastery to extrinsic loss aversion.

Team Motivation

PrincipleManager ActionExample
AutonomyHand over task, time, technique, team"Here's the goal. How you get there is up to you."
MasteryProvide challenge, feedback, growthStretch assignments, mentorship, learning budget
PurposeConnect work to mission"Here's why this matters for our customers"

Compensation and Incentives

Pay people enough to take money off the table — fair, ideally above-market — then focus on AMP; beyond "enough," more money doesn't increase motivation. Prefer "now-that" rewards (unexpected recognition after the fact: "You hit target! Here's a bonus.") over "if-then" rewards ("If you hit target, you get a bonus"), which create pressure and short-term thinking.

See references/applications.md when applying AMP to a concrete gamification, team-management, or compensation design — worked examples and escalation tables.

Type I vs. Type X Behavior

Type X (Extrinsic)Type I (Intrinsic)
Fueled by external rewardsFueled by autonomy, mastery, purpose
Seeks external recognitionSeeks inherent satisfaction
Short-term focus, fixed mindsetLong-term focus, growth mindset

Design products and teams that cultivate Type I behavior: it's made, not born; it doesn't disdain money or recognition; it's renewable; and it promotes well-being.

See references/type-i.md when shifting a team or user base from Type X to Type I — the full behavioral contrast and conversion tactics. For real-world AMP programs (Atlassian ShipIt, 3M, ROWE, Duolingo, Wikipedia), see references/case-studies.md.

Common Mistakes

MistakeWhy It FailsFix
Points for everythingCrowds out intrinsic motivationReserve rewards for meaningful milestones
Mandatory participationKills autonomyMake engagement opt-in
Same challenge for everyoneNo flow — boredom or anxietyAdaptive difficulty matching
No visible progressMastery is invisibleProgress indicators, skill tracking
Missing "why"Actions feel meaninglessConnect every feature to purpose
If-then bonusesShort-term thinking, gamingPay fairly; use "now-that" rewards; focus on AMP

Quick Diagnostic

Audit any motivation system:

QuestionIf NoAction
Can users choose what/when/how?Autonomy violationAdd choices, flexibility, customization
Can users see their progress?No mastery signalAdd progress tracking, skill levels
Is challenge matched to skill?Boredom or anxietyImplement adaptive difficulty
Is there immediate feedback?Can't improveAdd real-time response to actions
Does the user know WHY this matters?No purposeConnect to mission, show impact
Are we using "if-then" rewards?Extrinsic crowding-outSwitch to "now-that" or intrinsic design

Further Reading

Based on Daniel Pink's research on motivation science:

About the Author

Daniel H. Pink is the author of seven books, including four New York Times bestsellers. Drive, translated into 40+ languages, changed how organizations think about motivation, and his TED Talk on motivation science is among the most-viewed of all time. He was previously chief speechwriter for Vice President Al Gore.

同じリポジトリから

関連する Skills

すべての Skills
wondelai
コミュニティ

hundred-million-offers

Create irresistible offers using the Value Equation, bonus stacking, risk-reversing guarantees, and ethical scarcity. Use when the user mentions "grand slam offer", "make my offer more compelling", "what bonuses should I add", "guarantee strategy", "offer naming", or "people say its too expensive". Also trigger when packaging a product for higher perceived value, justifying premium pricing instead of discounting, designing a money-back guarantee, or structuring tiers to maximize conversions. Covers the MAGIC naming formula and starving-crowd targeting. For product positioning, see obviously-awesome. For outbound sales, see predictable-revenue.

導入数
2
GitHub Stars
2242
更新日
9月10日
wondelai
コミュニティ

negotiation

Prepare and execute negotiations using tactical empathy, calibrated questions, and the Ackerman method. Use when the user mentions "salary negotiation", "contract terms", "handling objections", "mirroring and labeling", "difficult conversation", "deal terms", "BATNA", "anchoring", "how do I ask for a raise", "get a better deal", or "they wont budge on price". Also trigger when preparing for a vendor negotiation, resolving a pricing dispute, or navigating a high-stakes conversation where both sides need to feel heard. Covers accusation audits, Black Swan discovery, and the "Thats Right" technique. For persuasion in product and marketing, see influence-psychology.

導入数
2
GitHub Stars
2242
更新日
9月10日
wondelai
コミュニティ

clean-architecture

Structure software around the Dependency Rule: source code dependencies point inward from frameworks to use cases to entities. Use when the user mentions "architecture layers", "dependency rule", "ports and adapters (hexagonal)", "onion architecture", "screaming architecture", "where should business logic go", "decouple from the database", "swap the framework without a rewrite", or "keep business rules independent". Also trigger when deciding which layer code belongs in, isolating core logic from infrastructure, defining module boundaries, or debating whether the framework should call your code or the reverse. Covers component principles, boundaries, and SOLID. For code-level quality, see clean-code. For domain modeling, see domain-driven-design.

導入数
1
GitHub Stars
2239
更新日
9月10日
wondelai
コミュニティ

refactoring-ui

Audit and fix visual hierarchy, spacing, color, and depth in web UIs. Use when the user mentions "my UI looks off" (or amateur/unprofessional), "fix the design", "Tailwind styling", "color palette", "visual hierarchy", "design system", "spacing scale", or "component styling". Also trigger when building consistent design tokens, creating dark mode themes, improving data-visualization clarity, or polishing UI details before launch. Covers grayscale-first workflow, constrained design scales, shadows, and component styling. For typeface selection, see web-typography. For usability audits, see ux-heuristics.

導入数
3
GitHub Stars
2226
更新日
9月10日