This article is part of the series on behavioral design and the DUDUR method .
You can find explanations of the common concepts here: Concepts in the DUDUR method .
When cyclist Mads Pedersen fights his way through rain and cold, we believe it's about willpower.
But as he himself has said: “I love to suffer on the bike. That's where I feel I'm alive.”
He doesn't cycle because someone motivates him. He cycles because it's him.
Training is not a means to success – it is the purpose.
Tennis player Caroline Wozniacki says it in her own way:
“I love the game. Even when I lose, I love playing tennis.”
She plays because she can't help it.
And the Icelandic musician Björk puts it even more simply:
“Music is not something I do – it's the way I understand the world.”
I think of my old doctor, Uffe, who was still looking up the Cochrane Review ( https://www.cochranelibrary.com/ ) a few weeks before he retired.
Not because anyone asked him to. Not for points or prestige. But because he was still professionally curious – and wanted to do it properly.
Four people, four worlds – same pattern:
Motivation arises when meaning, mastery, and curiosity begin to connect.
When what you do and who you are flow together.
We're trying to fix something that can't be fixed.
In many organizations, people talk about creating motivation.
But motivation is not something you can turn on from the outside.
It can only occur when the conditions are there.
When you try to push motivation forward, you get backlash.
It's called reactance ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_reactance ) – the resistance that arises when people feel their freedom is being restricted.
The more you try to control, the less desire people have to take ownership.
Pressure may sound friendly:
“Now we have created a process that makes it easy for you to do the right thing.”
“This is important, and you probably want to support it.”
But it's still pressure. It signals that the right thing has already been decided.
Motivation requires the opposite: trust, self-determination, and room for doubt.
A 3 that killed the meaning
I was once approached by a company who wanted me to make a video explaining to their employees that “3 on a scale of 1 to 5 is actually good.”
I said I could do that - but it wouldn't work.
The scale was part of their performance system, where 3 meant “meets expectations”.
But the system was linked to salary.
What was supposed to be a performance review was in practice a salary dictate.
I asked why they had made the scale.
She replied: “To motivate employees.”
Then I asked, “Do they feel motivated?”
There was silence. She never called again.
They had created a system that, on paper, was supposed to promote high performance.
But high performance doesn't come from turning up the motivation.
It comes from removing friction – making it safe to fail and possible to succeed.
It was only afterwards that I realized that the problem wasn't the number 3.
That was the scale.
Just being put into a box defined by others shifts motivation from internal to external.
When you are measured, you act to avoid punishment or chase reward.
And then the meaning disappears.
We do what makes sense – not what pays off
The classical motivation theories attempted to turn motivation into a calculation.
Maslow described needs. Vroom created a formula. Herzberg divided satisfaction into two categories.
But common to all of them was the assumption of the rational man:
That we do what is worthwhile.
The reality is the opposite.
We don't do what pays off – we do what makes sense.
And that's a much better explanation for why people act – or don't act.
Self-determination theory – the right track, used incorrectly
With Deci & Ryan ( https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/the-theory/ ), research took an important step.
They showed that people are motivated from within when three needs are met: self-determination, competence, and belonging.
But ironically, the theory was quickly turned into another management tool.
Organizations began to “design intrinsic motivation” – as if you could create self-determination by creating a questionnaire.
But the point was never to control people.
It was about creating conditions where motivation can arise on its own.
When self-determination becomes a schema, it again becomes control.
And then exactly what the theory was supposed to protect disappears.
Motivation is friction in the field of meaning
I think we have misunderstood what motivation is.
It is not willpower, but the absence of friction of opinion.
Most people want to do the right thing.
When they don't, it's rarely about reluctance – but about friction:
They can't see the point.
They don't feel safe.
They don't feel like they can.
Or it's too difficult.
Motivation arises when frictions are removed.
When something feels meaningful, safe, and possible, you almost have to make an effort not to act.
Want to delve deeper into why intrinsic motivation arises when we meet the need for self-determination, competence, and cohesion? Read more about self-determination theory here: https://elearningspecialist.com/blog/posts/2019/maj/den-vigtigste-teori-om-laering/
Meaning is not created in the manual, but in the relationship
Opinion is not a fixed quantity.
As Helle Hein ( https://hellehein.dk ) has shown, meaning is individual – what makes sense to one person may be meaningless to another.
But meaning is rarely created alone. It arises in the relationship between people.
Here, Louise Klinge (https://hansreitzel.dk/collections/louise-klinge) supplements the picture with the concept of relationship competence – the ability to meet another person in a way that confirms their value.
In school, the term is used between teacher and student, but it is equally relevant between manager and employee, or between colleagues in general.
When the relationship is experienced as appreciative and safe, the sense of meaning is strengthened.
When it is experienced as instrumental or controlling, friction of opinion arises.
Therefore, motivation is not just a question of inner drive, but of the quality with which we meet each other.
This is where leadership and learning intersect: Both are about creating spaces where people experience that their efforts have meaning – and where they are met as whole people, not as resources.
From motivation to enablement
We need to stop motivating people.
We need to start enabling them.
Motivation does not come from pressure, but from meaning, security and opportunity – but especially from meaning.
When we remove the friction of opinion, engagement follows by itself.
Leadership is therefore not about turning up the will, but about removing the distractions that make it difficult to will.
To create spaces where people can find the connection between what they do and what they believe in.
Motivation cannot be implemented.
But it can disappear if we turn it into a project.
The quiet pull from within
When I look at Mads Pedersen, Caroline Wozniacki, Björk – and my old doctor, Uffe – I don't see people who have been motivated.
I see people who act from an inner peace.
They want to because it makes sense.
They can because they dare.
They keep going because it's a part of them.
And perhaps this is where the real point lies.
Motivation is similar to learning in many ways.
We can't force ourselves to learn anything – just as we can't force ourselves to be motivated.
We can decide that we want to learn, but that doesn't mean we actually do it.
Learning happens when something hits us – when it makes sense.
And so does motivation.
We also can't help but learn when something feels relevant and alive.
In the same way, we can't help but be motivated when what we do is connected to who we are.
This is why attempts to create motivation or manage learning always end up in the same paradox:
The more we try to push it forward, the more it disappears.
Motivation and learning arise by themselves when the conditions are right –
when people are allowed to think for themselves, act freely and find meaning in what they do.
Motivation is not a project we have to run.
It is a state we must cherish.
A balance between meaning, mastery and humanity.
You can't motivate people.
You can't force them to learn.
You can only remove the friction – and make it possible for them to want to and to learn.
Did you like what you read?
If you think this made sense, you'll probably also want to follow my next project:
I am currently writing volume 2 in the series Superlearning? – the book From Learning Theater to Behavior.
It is about how we can use the DUDUR method to design learning and communication that actually changes behavior.
The book builds on The DNA of Learning – where I show how learning happens in the brain and how we can remove the bottlenecks that stand in the way of understanding, engagement and memory.
👉 If you want to be notified when From Learning Theatre to Behavior is published – and follow the work along the way, you can sign up here:
Keep me updated
You can also read more about the series at superlaering.dk