#95: Three Things that got me thinking
🏁Vettel's retirement + 💊addiction recovery + 🤷🏽quiet quitting
Hola, thoughtful reader.
Last week, I published a 20-minute podcast interview with INSEAD professor Jennifer Petriglieri, author of Couples that work (a book I recommend to all working couples), and I hope you’ll give it a listen. She gave us useful ideas on not getting sucked into other people’s life plans, the illusion of the 50/50 couple, as well as midlife crises and how to navigate them thoughtfully as a pair. You can read the whole transcript or listen here:
And now, onto Three Things that got me thinking about why we do the things we do:
The concerns of a Formula-1 champion
Rewards-based recovery programmes
Bad bosses
1. #THEREISSTILLARACETOWIN
In July, German race driver Sebastian Vettel said he’d retire from Formula 1 by the end of the 2022 season. He inaugurated his Instagram account (he had so far eschewed social media) with a stark black-and-white video announcement, explaining that racing is taking his time and energy away from his family and that there’s much more to his life than Formula 1.
I love this sport. It has been central to my life for since I can remember. […] Being a racing driver has never been my sole identity. I very much believe in identity by who we are and how we treat others rather than what we do.
[…] My goals have shifted from winning races and fighting for championships to seeing my children grow […].
While his statement doesn’t use the words “climate”, “environment”, or “petrol”, Vettel also hints at his environmental concerns (which he’s mentioned in clearer terms before and after his career announcement) as another reason behind his decision:
My passion comes with certain aspects that I have learned to dislike. […] Talk is not enough and we can not afford to wait. There is no alternative. The race is underway.
“People say I am greenwashing,” the UK Mirror quoted Vettel as saying last month. “I am and we are, but I try to do what I can.” I have no idea how much of a difference his stance can make in practice, in car racing or elsewhere. But I’ll take Vettel’s posture—admitting contradictions and trying to do something anyway, however small and imperfect—over this kind of superior, tone-deaf reaction.
2. Candy crush
Last month, the AP wrote about the rise of US programmes that give prizes (“candy, gum, gift cards, sunglasses and headphones”) to reward people for staying in treatment for opioid addiction. Writer Carla K. Johnson says such programmes are “widely recognized as the most effective treatment for people addicted to stimulants,” especially when “the dollar value increases with consistent performance.” She cites—among other experts—psychologist Stephen Higgins of the University of Vermont, who pioneered the method in 1991: “It’s very much using that same dopamine reward system that’s the basis for addictions to promote healthy behavior change.”
Motivation researcher Ayelet Fishbach, author of Get It Done, told me in June about the over justification effect:
[Past] research on over justification made the point that when you give kids rewards for drawing, they will not want to draw once the incentive is removed. You want to have justification, just not over justification. The difference is often subtle. [Does the incentive fit the activity,] or is it an over justification that takes away from my enjoyment?
I wonder if and how this plays out here, and I’m curious to know what happens after these recovery programmes end. Does it matter that the incentives aren’t directly linked to the rewarded behaviour? Will the direct benefits of recovery itself become the reward?
Harold Lewis, a former cook in recovery, says in the AP report:
At first, I was like: ‘I don’t need a prize!’ But after I won, like, $80 in gift cards, it became a little sweeter. Recovery should be fun because you’re getting your life back.
3. Blame it on me
Yes, I know. Quiet quitting seems to be merely a fancy alliteration to describe behaviours as old as salaried work. I have read about three pieces about it: one article to understand what the name meant; one from my Substack friend Jessica Wilen because I knew she’d have a thoughtful take that’d make sense for my life as a working parent; and this one over at Harvard Business Review last week (because it was picked up by my “intrinsic motivation” news alert).
The story’s all in the headline: “Quiet Quitting Is About Bad Bosses, Not Bad Employees”:
It’s easy to place the blame for quiet quitting on lazy or unmotivated workers, but instead, this research is telling us to look within and recognize that individuals want to give their energy, creativity, time, and enthusiasm to the organizations and leaders that deserve it.
