It’s almost impressive how consistently managers get motivation wrong. Ask them what drives people, and you hear the usual list: good pay, stable contracts, career opportunities. Ask employees the same question, and the answers shift sharply toward appreciation, being included, and basic human understanding. That gap alone explains more workplace frustration than most leaders want to admit.
The data is nothing new.
The first version of this survey showed up in the 1940s. Managers confidently ranked salary, security, and promotions at the top. Employees, on the other hand, put appreciation at number one, being “in on things” at number two, and a supportive boss at number three.
Yes, the list is almost eighty years old.
Yes, people still behave as if it was published yesterday.
And this mismatch isn’t abstract. You feel it in every company, every transformation, every leadership offsite. Managers lean into the “hard stuff” because it feels familiar. They can point to it. Measure it. Control it. It’s safe territory.
The “soft stuff”? That’s a different story.
Appreciation.
Trust.
Transparency.
Actually listening.
Actually caring.
This is where things get uncomfortable, because many leaders were never trained in this. Their education taught them operations, processes, KPIs. Their career rewarded them for control and expertise, not connection and vulnerability. If you grow up in a Tayloristic environment (see Scientific Management), you naturally absorb Tayloristic instincts. It’s the only model you’ve ever seen.
So of course they avoid the human side.
It makes them feel unskilled.
It threatens their identity as “strong leaders.”
It exposes them to emotional situations they were never prepared for.
And it forces them to admit that the real levers of motivation aren’t the ones they’ve been doubling down on for years.
I see this especially clearly in agile transformations. Companies pour enormous energy into process frameworks, roles, events, and tools. And every time, the same pattern emerges: the human foundations are treated as optional, “Phase 2,” or something to look at once the “real work” is done.
Ironically, the real work was the human part all along.
Because no transformation fails due to a missing Scrum event or a slightly imperfect workflow.
Transformations fail because people don’t feel trusted, don’t feel informed, don’t feel appreciated, or don’t feel psychologically safe enough to change.
When leaders start to understand that, things finally shift.
Often it begins with something surprisingly simple. Kudo cards, for example. Handwritten appreciation. Leaders always underestimate them. They imagine it’s too trivial to matter — until they try it. Then they see what it does to people. How it changes the tone of a team. How it lands. Some leaders tell me years later that those moments still shape their work.
Or API — Assuming Positive Intent.
Another deceptively simple idea that changes how leaders interact with others. Suddenly situations that used to trigger conflict become manageable. People who used to feel like adversaries become partners. Leaders realize they can walk into the same conversations with a completely different outcome simply by adjusting how they interpret others’ intentions.
None of this is complicated.
None of it is expensive.
None of it requires a framework with a trademark symbol.
But it does require leaders to step into areas they’ve avoided for most of their careers. And that’s why the Motivation Gap persists. It’s easier to tweak a process than to examine yourself. It’s easier to add a metric than to give genuine appreciation. It’s easier to discuss a framework than to build trust.
Yet the data hasn’t changed in eighty years.
People want to feel valued.
They want to be informed.
They want a leader who treats them like a human.
If organizations could finally close that gap, most of their motivation problems would disappear. But for that to happen, leaders have to stop assuming they already know what drives their people — and actually look at the data that’s been sitting right in front of them since the 1940s.
FAQ
What is the Motivation Gap?
It’s the mismatch between what leaders believe motivates people and what employees say actually motivates them. Leaders tend to focus on pay, security, and career paths, while employees prioritize appreciation, involvement, and human understanding.
Why do leaders avoid the “soft stuff”?
Because it requires emotional competence, presence, and vulnerability. Many leaders were trained for control and analysis, not connection and trust.
Is the data really that old?
Yes. The foundational study is from the 1940s, and its findings have been replicated for decades. The patterns haven’t changed.
How does this show up in agile transformations?
Companies over-invest in process and tools while treating human motivation as optional. Without trust and psychological safety, no framework will work.
What simple steps make a difference?
Genuine appreciation, assuming positive intent, and involving people in what’s happening. These cost nothing and build the foundations of motivation.