← Professor Game Podcast
Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
What is the difference between a group of students hacking a high security exam and a multi million dollar enterprise AI rollout? The answer might be the reason your team probably isn't using the AI tools you just bought for them. Picture this, a lockdown proctored face to face supervised online exam. The security was very real. Students still got chatgpt to answer questions questions for them live inside that exam in that locked environment through a Chrome extension. Nobody gave them a license, nobody trained them. There was no change management program and the adoption was instant, total and creative enough to beat the security. Meanwhile, companies are spending millions and billions on AI rollouts where the licenses get bought and nobody opens the app. Same tech, opposite outcome. I'm Rob, I'm the host of Professor Game and I head Engagement Europe at the Octalysis group where we help companies turn motivation into real outcomes. And today I'll show you why the difference between those two scenarios isn't the AI. It has everything to do with the motivation. We'll break down the accidental motivation engine inside the exam and hold it up right next to the enterprise that actually fails with this implementation and leave you with a diagnostic question you can ask if your own team and of course if you like looking at the core drives being pulled apart in real situations like this one. That's pretty much what our core drives in the wild email series is all about. A few days of real corporate cases, the ones that got motivation right, the train wrecks and the read through this whole framework and of course my own take and through my experience. The link is below in the description if you want it. Now let's get into this one. The dominant frame for for AI in organizations nowadays is an adoption problem. How do we get people to use the tool? But the students prove that the adoption was never something difficult. Give a human enough reason and they'll adopt a tool faster than any corporate rollout plan could ever dream of. They'll out engineer your security to get to their objective. So if adoption is actually effortless when motivation is high, then every failed enterprise rollout isn't a tooling failure or a training failure at all. It is a motivation failure wearing a tooling costume. The more capable AI becomes, the more the bottleneck becomes the human layer. Capability stops being a real constraint and motivation becomes the whole game. But let's take a look at why the student's motivation was so well built. In fact, completely by accident through the octalis lens, the exam was an unintentional motivation engine pointed at the wrong outcome in octalysis terms the business metrics were not being really targeted. Enter Core Drive 8 loss and avoidance. Failing the exam is real, immediate and high stakes loss. You're driven into action so that something that is really bad for them doesn't happen. That's a very dominant driver here. It's enormous in fact. And don't get me wrong, this isn't about justifying students who didn't study for the exam or who actually spend their time trying to go through the security rather than studying. I'm not talking about that. It is just about facing the reality that oftentimes it is something that you need to consider in your design rather than just try to upfront fight against. Then there's core drive six, scarcity and impatience. You only get one shot, limited time window, no second chance at the moment. This scarcity is honest, it's true. And it's very real for every single student. That is a ferocious motivation stat. Core drive to development and accomplishment, making progress, clearing this hurdle for them, the passing grade, just moving forward. This is something that is broken. It's the extrinsic progression path that leads to an extrinsic diploma. Not the genuine interest for learning and actually getting better. But again, face the facts and work with and through them. And then we have core drive six scarcity and impatience. One shot time the window. No second chance in the moment. This scarcity is truthful, it's honest, it is very rare, real. That is a ferocious motivation stack. Notice that it's only, almost only black hat. The same family drives that the airline is also using on you on the loyalty program. Except here they were strong enough to make people build technical workarounds in real time. Here's the part that matters for you. This system got exactly the behavior it actually rewarded. It rewarded. Producing the right answer under pressure. So? So a tool that produces the right answer under pressure was almost a rational, almost inevitable response from the students. They weren't subverting the system, they were responding to it. Now that points to a much bigger problem with how we structure exams in the first place. Yes, indeed, whether they ever measured what we thought they did. But that is a completely separate episode on its own. So I'll leave it part for today. Now look at the flip side of this coin. An enterprise with a paid license, training, IT support, leadership, mandate everything that the students never got. And adoption completely stalls. Why? Because none of those things are actual motivation. Let's look at the absence of the very drives that the students were up against. There's no real lost in avoidance, nothing bad Happens to me personally or even professionally. If I don't touch the AI tool, my old workflow definitely gets the job done. There's no development and accomplishment. It doesn't visibly make me better at something I care about. It's framed as a company efficiency plan. Not my win at all. There's no real scarcity or impatience for this. It is available. It's available for everyone, and everybody just like me is supposed to have access to it. On top of that, if you don't have these motivations, you don't either have something like epic meaning or ownership. It's something that's being done onto me, not something that is mine. The enterprise bought the most capable tool and surrounded it with zero motivation. The exam accidentally built this ferocious motivation engine we talked about around. Basically, a free chatbot. Capability was never the variable. What does this mean for you and future implementations? First thing, adoption. The more powerful the tool, the more its entire value depends on whether anyone is motivated to use it. The motivation layer is now the highest leverage thing to design, not the tooling. Second, and this is the very uncomfortable one direction. Even once the tool is being adopted, it only helps moving the needle if it is actually pointed and designed for hitting the right goal. And the motivation decides where it actually gets pointed. The students aimed AI at passing the exam, not at learning something new. They didn't just prove that motivation drives adoption effortlessly. They also proved something sharper. Motivation pointed at the wrong goal gives you flawless adoption of exactly the behavior you didn't want. That's the deeper version of the whole idea. Your motivation architecture decides both whether the AI gets used and what it really gets used for. So what does that mean? As AI removes the capability constraints, the human motivation layer becomes the only constraint that is left. That's it. This is exactly why behavioral design matters more in the AI era, not less. The smarter these tools get, the more the bottleneck is us, the people, never the tech. Here's your prompt for today. If you're running an AI initiative right now, stop asking, is the tool good enough? Or have we trained our people in the tool? Although these are important, of course. Ask instead. What does my team actually gain personally, individually, professionally, by using this? And what do they lose by ignoring it? If your honest answer is nothing much, either way, no rollout plan is going to save it. You're on a motivation vacuum, and that tool will sit unused no matter how capable it is. The students had a crystal clear answer to both questions. Does your team have an answer to them? Here is the whole reframe for you to take away. Most AI initiatives are being run as only a technology project. They're actually motivation driven design projects wearing a technology costume. That's one core drive situation read out in the wild. An exam that ferociously built this motivational engine and an enterprise failing because they spent millions building no motivational engine at all. And if that's the kind of thing that you want more of, that's exactly what I do in our free guide Core Drives in the Wild. A few days of real corporate cases, the wins, the train wrecks all pulled apart through the view of the core drives and of course my own perspective and experience. You'll get also regular emails after that but the series is the part that I think right now you'll actually be looking forward to if you want it. The links is below in the description and engagers as always at least for now and for today it is time to say that it's game over.