Flow at Workplace

The objective of this article is to identify how organization could incorporate an environment which is conducive to Flow. If applied, fosters creativity and performance. Businesses adopting productivity mindset benefit from flow in the workplace because employees in this state are more productive and engaged. The cost of disengaged, stressed, and burned-out employees is detrimental for organization. 

Introduction 

When people focus on a work assignment by losing track of their time, they feel a sense of engagement and feel like they can achieve the challenging tasks in front of them through creativity and effort. Not only is such work satisfying for an individual, but it also yields better results for the organization. 

This model is known as Flow theory, which proposes that the entire business can be more productive when team members are maximally engaged with their day-to-day activities. 

Flow in the workplace refers to the state of mind of an individual who is focused on and actively engaged in an activity. This principle was developed by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a psychologist whose work has been highly influential in the field of organizational management. 

Csikszentmihalyi suggests that, when an individual reaches a flow state, they may become completely absorbed in their work to the point that they lose track of time and tune out external distractions. In other words, they are working at a peak level of efficiency and productivity — and doing so with a high level of satisfaction in what they are doing. For businesses, this represents an opportunity to scale up productivity while also keeping employees happy and morale high. Simply put, employees who enjoy what they do and find meaning in it will be more willing to put forth their best effort and tackle their work with more creativity and vigour. 

Deci and Ryan’s Theory of Motivation 

Self-Determination Theory, or SDT, which links personality, human motivation, and optimal functioning grew from researchers Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan’s work on motivation in the 1970s and 1980s. It states that there are 2 main types of motivation - Intrinsic and Extrinsic - and that both are powerful forces in shaping who we are and how we behave. 

But there is another important distinction in the types of motivation and SDT differentiates between autonomous motivation and controlled motivation. 

Autonomous motivation focuses primarily on internal sources of motivation such as a need to gain knowledge or independence. Controlled motivation consists of external regulation—a type of motivation where an individual acts out of the desire for external rewards or fear of punishment. 

According to Deci, giving people extrinsic rewards for already intrinsically motivated behaviour can undermine autonomy. As the behaviour becomes increasingly controlled by external rewards, people begin to feel less in control of their own behaviour and intrinsic motivation is diminished. 

As per SDT, the satisfaction of basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness are at the heart of employee engagement. 

Purely self-determined behaviours tend to be intrinsically driven and are done for enjoyment, interest, and inherent satisfaction for the action itself. On the other hand, non-self-determined behaviours, which are performed only because they must be done. On this extreme end of the scale, there is a complete lack of control. 

Three basic Human Needs (Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness) 

Autonomy 

People have a need to feel that they are the masters of their own destiny and that they have at least some control over their lives; most importantly, people have a need to feel that they are in control of their own behaviour. Psychological need for autonomy can be satisfied by empowering employees to make decisions on how, when and where they do their jobs. 

Managers should support their employees’ need for satisfaction, especially autonomy; this can lead to happier and more competent employees as well as better organizational outcomes. 

When managers are themselves high in autonomy, their subordinates are likely to be high in autonomy as well, leading to better performance and higher organizational commitment. 

Good leadership encourages employees to set their own, autonomously conceived and regulated goals, which are more motivating and more likely to end in success than goals assigned to them by management. In fact, it is sometimes called negentropy which is opposite to psychic entropy (condition of inner disorder) – those who attain it develop a stronger, more confident self, because more of their psychic energy has been invested successfully in goals they themselves had chosen to pursue. 

Competence 

People have a need to build their competence and develop mastery over tasks that are important to them. Control leads to compliance and Autonomy leads to Engagement. 

Solving complex problems requires an inquiring mind and the willingness to experiment one’s way to a fresh solution, which seeks engagement. Only engagement can produce mastery. 

The need for competence can be fostered by effective praise and appropriate on-the-job challenges. For example: Meaningful and personalized recognition; Opportunities to learn, mentor and teach; time to innovate and to explore without fear of making mistakes. 

Relatedness 

People need to have a sense of belonging and connectedness with others; each of us needs other people to some degree (Deci & Ryan, 2008). 

Relatedness is exemplified in high-quality relationships that make us feel like we are a part of a community. Not surprisingly Gallup organizational surveys measuring employee wellbeing show that workplace friendships are a strong predictor of job satisfaction. 

Being a part of a cohesive and supportive team satisfies not only individual needs for belonging but also organizational needs for greater collaboration (Friedman, 2015). 

According to Daniel Coyle, cohesive teams exhibit these three characteristics: 

1. They feel safe to take risks.
2. They share vulnerabilities and can count on each other as shared risk is tremendously connecting; and
3. They have an established narrative that gives their teams a sense of purpose and direction and involves them in a shared goal.

Efficiency vs Productivity Mindset 

The common definition of labour efficiency is: “the number of labour hours required to accomplish a given task, when compared with the standard in that industry or setting.” Efficiency is about doing the same with less. Companies most often improve labour efficiency by finding ways to reduce the number of labour hours required to produce the same level of output. Efficiency, then, is about shrinking the denominator — inputs (headcount, labour hours) — to improve profitability. 

Productivity definition appears similar. A common definition of labour productivity is: “the ratio of the output of goods and services to the labour hours devoted to the

production of that output.” Productivity is about doing more with the same. For organization, it is directly tied to performance. 

Most employees want to be productive, but the organization too often gets in their way. Leaders that take a productivity mindset seek to eliminate organizational drag at every turn. People have huge amounts of discretionary energy that they could devote to their work, but many are not sufficiently inspired to do so. Inspired employees bring more discretionary energy to their work every day. As a result, they are 125% more productive than an employee who is merely satisfied. 

Executives with a productivity mindset do everything they can to tap into every employee’s reservoir of discretionary energy. They strive to align the firm’s purpose with everyone’s purpose. They invest in improving the inspirational leadership capabilities of their managers at every level. And they build a culture of autonomy and accountability that provides every employee with the opportunity to do their best work. While these steps may not inspire every employee, they can increase the level of inspiration across the organization and, with it, workforce productivity. 

Management Practice in Workplace 

Management practices many of the organizations adopt comes from the Industrial revolution, which focuses on managing people and processes, and maximizing production. Obsess over efficiency rather that productivity. When it comes to strategy, however, efficiency and productivity are very different. 

Gallup, 2018 survey report percentages of “engaged” workers in the US since 2000. The 2018 results, highest in Gallup’s history, were at 34% of actively engaged employees and 13% of actively disengaged workers, making the ratio of approximately two to one (or 2.6 to 1 to be exact). That leaves us with 53% percent of workers who are neither happy nor miserable. They report to be satisfied but show up for work to do only the required minimum. They are not connected to their workplace and are likely to leave for the next best opportunity. 

Behavioural scientists often divide what we do on the job into two categories, Algorithmic and Heuristic. An algorithmic task is one in which you follow a set of established instructions down a single pathway to one conclusion. A heuristic task is the opposite, an individual has to experiment with possibilities and devise a novel solution. 

During the twentieth century most work was algorithmic, the tasks carried out were often routine. But today, most of these tasks are outsourced or automated. The consulting firm McKinsey & Co. estimates that in the United States, only 30 percent of job growth now comes from algorithmic work, while 70 percent comes from heuristic work. 

Research from Harvard Business School, Teresa Amabile has found that external rewards and punishments can work nicely for algorithmic tasks. But they can be devastating for heuristic ones. Amabile calls it the intrinsic motivation principle of creativity, which holds, in part: “Intrinsic motivation is conducive to creativity; controlling extrinsic motivation is detrimental to creativity.” 

Incorporating Flow in Workplace 

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi discovered, in his years of research into creativity and productivity and interviews with people, that the secret to their optimal performance was their ability to enter the state of flow frequently and deliberately. They would describe feeling a sense of competence and control, a loss of self-consciousness, and such intense absorption in the task at hand that they would lose track of time. The biggest benefit of being in flow is that it amplifies performance. 

Flow in the workplace means employees are most fully engaged when their skill sets are balanced against the challenge at hand. When this balance is achieved, the employees feel a heightened sense of personal satisfaction in their work. They feel as though they are being stretched, challenged to use their abilities as fully as possible, without being overwhelmed. 

To create such an environment, one important consideration is assigning employees the right types of goals. Goals should be reasonable to encourage flow. Team members should be pushed and challenged, or they will become complacent or disengaged. At the same time, their goals should always be attainable. When goals are too ambitious, employees may feel like they are being set up for failure. 

Along with setting reasonable goals, managers should provide employees with helpful feedback after they have accomplished their goals, highlighting areas for both commendation and improvement. With this kind of feedback, employers assure their team members they are on the right track while also giving them specific ways to stretch their limits — just the kind of balance that can produce a flow state. 

When employees achieve flow, they are often more effective at their jobs. Team members who are working in a flow-positive environment will feel as though they have clarity about the projects and goals set before them and that their leaders have effectively communicated everything they need to know to succeed. 

As they begin their work, employees will have increased awareness about what they are doing, finding it easy to concentrate and shut out distractions. Through the balance of challenging yet attainable goals, they will have a clear sense that they can accomplish what has been asked of them so long as they fully exercise their skills. This flow state empowers employees to put forth their best effort. 

When these factors are in place, employees have a greater sense of agency in their own work, which propels them to produce better results and be more efficient. This is a win-win situation, one in which employees are more likely to enjoy what they do while performing at higher levels. 

Group Flow 

Keith Sawyer who studied under Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and studying jazz ensembles and improv groups as well as business professionals he realized that teams experiencing group flow were actually the best performers. 

Teams require a clear, team-level common goal, which is internalized by all members of the team. Group flow is more likely to emerge when everyone is fully engaged and deep listening, when focused on the natural progress emerging from members’ work, not on meeting a deadline set by management. 

Team autonomy is the top predictor of team performance. Participants must feel in control, yet at the same time they must remain flexible, listen closely, and always be willing to defer to the emergent flow of the group. Each person’s idea builds on those just contributed by his or her colleagues, small ideas build, and an innovation emerges. 

Group flow is more likely to occur when all participants play an equal role in the collective creation of the final performance. Group flow is blocked if anyone’s skill level is below that of the rest of the group’s members; all must have comparable skill levels. It’s also blocked when one person dominates, is arrogant, or doesn’t think anything can be learned from the conversation.   

Problem-finding groups are more likely to be in group flow if there is more diversity; problem-solving groups are often more effective when more tacit knowledge is shared. 

Group flow flourishes when people follow the first rule of improvisational acting: “Yes, and . . .” Listen closely to what’s being said; accept it fully; and then extend and build on it. 

Most businesses are designed to minimize risk, and most of them punish failure. But research shows us there is no creativity without failure, and there is no group flow without the risk of failure. These two common research findings go hand in hand, because group flow is often what produces the most significant innovations. 

Conclusion 

We all want to be happy at work, not only because we spend a significant part of our life working, but also because it is a source of meaning for many of us and the lessons for wellbeing, we learn here can be applied to other areas of our lives. 

To love one’s work is to be engaged, to experience such a complete sense of absorption, that action and awareness merge. When we become one with what we do it leads to optimal performance, cognitive and physical. 

Meaningful, engaging work not only fuels our professional achievements but also contributes to the growth of our organization and creates a sense of fulfilment that echoes across all our personal strivings. 

Coming decades, it will be critical for business leaders to adopt a productivity mindset. Instead of focusing on continuously managing the denominator, by cutting headcount, executives should identify ways to boost the numerator, and increase output. By systematically removing obstacles to productivity, deploying talent strategically, and inspiring a larger percentage of their workforce, leaders can dramatically improve productivity and reignite top-line growth. 

Engagement as a route to mastery is a powerful force in our personal lives. While complying can be an effective strategy for physical survival, it is a lousy one for personal fulfilment. Living a satisfying life requires more than simply meeting the demands of those in control. Yet in our offices we have way too much compliance and way too little engagement. The former might get you through the day, but only the latter will get you through the night. 

Bibliography 

• Deci, E. and Ryan, R., 2000. The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), pp.227-268.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-Determination Theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49, 182-185. doi:10.1037/a0012801
• Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362. doi:10.1002/job.322
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY, US: Plenum Press.
• Coyle, D. (2018). The Culture Code: The Secrets of Highly Successful Groups. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
• Csíkszentmihályi, M. (2004). Good Business: Leadership, Flow, and the Making of Meaning. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
• Csíkszentmihályi, M. (2018). The Evolving Self: A Psychology for the Third Millennium. New York, NY: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
• Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York, NY: HaperCollins.
• Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1997). Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
• Friedman, R. (2015). The Best Place to Work: The Art and Science of Creating an Extraordinary Workplace. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
• Great Companies Obsess Over Productivity, Not Efficiency. (2021). Retrieved 28 January 2021, from https://hbr.org/2017/03/great-companies-obsess-over-productivity-not-efficiency
• (2018). Employee Engagement on the Rise in the U.S. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/241649/employee-engagement-rise.aspx
• Kotler, S. (2014). The Rise of Superman: Decoding the Science of Ultimate Human Performance. London, UK: Quercus Publishing.
• (2018) Employee experience: essential to compete. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/the-organization-blog/employee-experience-essential-to-compete
• Rheinberg F., Engeser S. (2018) Intrinsic Motivation and Flow. In: Heckhausen J., Heckhausen H. (eds) Motivation and Action. Springer, Cham
• Pink, D. (2019). Drive. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Business Contact.
• THE THEORY OF " FLOW " AND ITS RELEVANCE FOR ORGANIZATIONS. (2020).
• Flow at Work and Basic Psychological Needs. (2020).
• Large Stakes and Big Mistakes. (2020).
• Group Flow and Group Genius, Sawyer, Keith, NAMTA Journal, v40 n3 p29-52 Sum 2015

Yours Loving  

Arjun Vijeth  

Peak Performance and Life Coach  

Book a Call | Facebook | LinkedIn  

P.S: 

1. Download the Discover Your Core Values Workbook. This consists of:

1. 7 Steps to identify your core values and discover your authentic self.
2. Help you to give your values a presence in your life, so that you could lead values-based life.

Please download it here – Discover Your Core Values

2. As a Peak Performance/Life Coach, Mentor and Certified Lifebook Leader, I am pleased to share and provide a structured, proven method that helps anyone define or redefine their goals and purpose.  

Lifebook is a transformational lifestyle design system that empowers you to envision, plan, and achieve your very best life - on your own terms, and nobody else's. By breaking down the 12 key categories that make up your life, and implementing successful goals, you'll be equipped with the tools to take charge of your life in the best way possible. 

If you or anyone you know might be interested, please check out the link here.  

We've been given this one life, why not make the most of it?