The candlestick problem

The Candle Problem:?

The "Candle Problem" is a test of creative problem solving developed by psychologist Karl Duncker in 1945. The test challenges "functional fixedness", a cognitive bias that makes it difficult to use familiar objects in different ways.?

Subjects are given a candle, a box of tacks, and a box of matches, and asked to?fix the lit candle to the wall so that it will not drip wax onto the table below.

Duncker observed that some of the subjects tried to attach the candle directly to the wall with the tacks. Some tried to glue the candle to the wall by melting it. Few thought of using the box as a candle-holder. Why? Simply because the box was presented as a receptacle for the tacks. The subjects were too fixated on the box's function as presented in the problem.

Can science actually help us be more efficient in the workplace?

The problem discussed above needs an ‘out of the box’ strategy to be solved.

In another study Sam Glucksberg (A pioneer in the field of experimental psycholinguistics) at Princeton University divided people into two groups.

He offered one group rewards for solving the candle problem and the other was sent in without an incentive.?

The results

It took the incentivised group 3 and a half minutes, on average, longer than their counterparts to find that the box holding the tacks was not just to contain the objects but is in itself the piece that solves the puzzle.?

This is a perfect example of “functional fixedness”. The tacks container is to be emptied, mounted on the wall with the tacks and then the lit candle can easily be placed on it.

Financial incentives

Performance-based compensation has for a long time been used as an incentive to increase effort and productivity among employees. The reason for using performance-based compensation is due to an apparent, well established and well documented relationship; the performance-based compensation is thought to increase motivation and effort, which in turn increase performance.?

Over the last few decades research has indicated that in some circumstances, financial incentives could actually lead to a reduction in performance.

Standard incentive theory

Financial incentives – Increased Motivation and effort – Increased performance?

Criticism has been raised against the first of these assumptions. Some scholars claim that the use of financial incentives can create a “conflict of motivation,” where the extrinsic motivation created by the use of financial incentives reduce or crowd out,?intrinsic motivation.

In addition, the “multi-task problem” has been put forth (Prendergast, 1999); when a part of the task is rewarded, the motivation and effort that goes into the non-rewarded part of the task can be reduced.?

A good example of such can be a teacher whose pay is dependent on the students’ exam results; this can cause the teacher to focus on teaching the students exam-relevant questions, while overlooking other equally important parts of the curriculum.?

Another example links into the much talked about the 4-day working week. Employees are motivated to get their work done and done well to ensure they are able to enjoy the longer weekend or extra time off during the week.

Despite years of scientific evidence that indicates that we might need to rethink how to motivate employees, most organisations continue to practice the Carrot-and-Stick reward system.

Organisations whose employees fall in the tacks-inside-the-box category might want to change the way they think about employee motivation.?

So, what are you doing to motivate employees? Is your organisation using appropriate and differentiated incentives?

If you would like more information on?employee motivation, please feel free to get in touch.