The Drive Alignment Toolkit: Steering the Engine with Intention
Key Motivational Needs Underlying Drive
To fully understand how drive can be moderated, we need to understand what motivational needs lie at its root. A need for achievement is often a major motivating factor for many leaders, often fueled by a sense of self-efficacy - the self-belief in one’s ability to successfully perform a specific task. Some leaders were high performing in school or on the sports field - and felt the rush of high performance when they excelled in a given task. This creates a feedback loop of achievement - doing more to feel more of that high-performance rush.
The need for uniqueness is often also a major motivating factor and is a natural, normal, and healthy desire. Everyone has this need in varying extents, and it can be thought of as a mid-range “healthy” level of narcissism. Narcissism is a bit of a dirty word in many contexts, but it really is a normal, healthy need at these moderate levels. However, when left unchecked, drive can fuel unhealthy narcissism - an inward self-focus so extreme it can be hard to “snap” out of to weigh the needs of others. To borrow the engine metaphor, that’s when an engine might be overheating - resulting in us derailing.
Therefore, we need to channel ourselves toward goals by using processes such as ongoing self-monitoring and feedback to make sure we aren’t stepping into unhealthy ranges of self-focus. For this reason, drive can be thought of as a dynamic process, not a fixed trait. Like an engine might need extra attention and care after going on a cross-country road trip, we need to constantly tend to and tune-up our drive to make it the most effective it can be.
What Do We Mean by “Values”? Let’s Be Clear.
Values shouldn’t be assumed. When we refer to “values,” we’re referring to humanistic values that support dignity and well-being. Examples of these are responsibility, integrity, service, equity, and empathy.
One framework that fits into this mold is the Fortune 500’s ever-stated favorite leadership philosophy - servant leadership. Servant leadership is of course an important frame for leadership - but our understanding of effective leadership is much broader. Effective leadership is often dual. It is composed of both the relational, moral, humanistic side and the ability to hold task, direction, accountability. Only when both sides are combined are leaders truly effective. Leaders who adopt humanistic values AND lead with results are better for business. Leaders who channel their drive through humanistic values are more likely to inspire goal attainment, foster trust, respond with agility, and build effective, resilient teams.
Reflect on the Ethics that Interact with Your Ambition
Ethical drive can be thought of as ambition (the engine) bounded by purpose and values (the compass) - not just intensity (horsepower). What are our values? What is driving us?
Coach’s Note: Drive is a Lever, Not the Outcome
Through an executive coaching lens, drive is not the goal - it’s a tool to get us where we want to go. With reflection and values clarity, it becomes a renewable resource that leaders can productively apply.
Ambition shouldn’t be thought of as a dirty word - when we aim our energy, we can achieve amazing things. However, we do need to think about it as a resource that can be aimed responsibly or not. To propel our teams and our organizations to greatness, we need to think humanistically - and think about how our values can be tied to achieving collective purpose. Indeed, ethical, prosocial leadership is more effective leadership. It’s better for the bottom line and future-proofs organizations – when organizations don’t operate in this way, the consequences can be disastrous.
Use this toolkit to understand how and where you’re fine-tuning your engine, and where else your engine needs support.
Try the Drive Alignment Toolkit
Key References
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical Leadership: A Review and Future Directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and Leadership: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765–780.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. Cambridge University Press.
Siegling, A. B., & Petrides, K. V. (2016). Drive: Theory and construct validation. PLOS ONE, 11(6), e0157295. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157295
De Feyter, T., Caers, R., Vigna, C., & Berings, D. (2012). Unraveling the impact of the Big Five personality traits on academic performance: The moderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy and academic motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(4), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.03.013