Often when we consider what motivates us at work, our thoughts take on a very individual tone. Research from George Mason University School of Business suggests this is a mistake, and that our partnerships with others at work play a crucial role as a motivating force.

The study finds that people who are more individualistically oriented tend to bond best with those who they believe can help them achieve their goals, which often includes high achievers and experts. By contrast, those with a more relational orientation will look for relationships that are more mutually supportive. Finally, those with a collective orientation will look for those they perceive to be similar to them so that they can heighten their sense of fitting in.

Identity matters

The lesson is that common team affiliation is not enough on its own to result in partnerships forming. Instead, if managers want to encourage supportive behaviors on their team, it’s important that they understand the orientation of each team member and then identify compatible partners.

“Managers should start dialogues and conversation, understand employees’ views and how they think about things,” they explain. “If they have the luxury of putting certain people together, they can ask them what they care about. To motivate people, you should find out what their motivations are based on.”

The authors explain that most people strive to find an “identity partner” when they first join a team, with their choice of partner then playing a role in shaping the level of social integration they enjoy in the team. These attempts are something that managers should ideally be keeping an eye on, as relational identity can help to predict any dangers in the team.

For instance, every dyadic relationship is an opportunity for gremlins to spread their disaffection. Therefore, managers should make extra efforts to ensure every member of the team is as well-integrated as possible. This is especially so as relational identity also plays a crucial motivating role, but it’s one that managers seldom give weight to.

“Managers are mainly focused on other things, the wrong things,” the authors conclude. “They tell their teams, ‘We have these values; we should share these values.’ But individuals are more influenced by other team members about what’s going on in the team. Look at what’s happening on the dyadic level; that’s where so much of the action is.”