Notes, Bytes, and Motivation:

Individual and Environmental Motivators in Music and IT

By James Capozzi, Elizabeth Carter, Brant Goble, Ryan O’Connell (TNU 2007)

Introduction

      While researchers have applied motivational theory to a variety of industrial and commercial settings, they have not done the same with musicians.  Professional artists, regardless of the medium, are workers, and their studios are work environments.  Motivational theories, such as those postulated by Kurt Lewin should, therefore, apply to them as well.  Lewin’s principle behavioral formula argues that behavior is a function of both the environment and the individual.¹ Despite the universality of this theory; musicians and their environments are different from those of other professions.  How Lewin’s theory applies to them is also, presumably, different.

Some logical questions about these differences are:

 *Are the personalities of musicians inherently different from those of Information Technology professionals?

 *Is childhood training a prerequisite to success in either field?

 *Are musicians inherently more creative than are IT workers?

 *What are the differences in the manner in which IT workers and musicians perceive themselves and their professions?

 *Does their dependence on technology make IT workers more sensitive to environment than are musicians?

     To develop more sophisticated conclusions, this document will compare musicians to Information Technology (IT) workers.    What motivates people to enter either one of these professions?  By answering questions about the motivation of each group, the authors will illustrate the differences between them. 

     The factors that motivate musicians are different from those of IT workers because they are psychologically different.  IT workers are not inherently uncreative, but they may express their creativity differently.  This much is common sense, but the specifics of these differences are not so obvious.  Through an examination of published research as well as personal interviews, this document examines these differences. They may not prove as great as they initially seem.

The Musical Equation (Lewin’s Theory and Musicians)

     "Music was always just something I did.  Then I began to understand that it was more than that--something that is such a part of me, I can't imagine my life without it."²

     This quote from the Peabody Institute Conservatory website doubtless resonates with many musicians.  In a series of articles created for the Peabody website, David Lane describes conservatory musicians.  He says they are "incredibly hard-working, intelligent, and focused young people" facing "complex choices" as they pursue musical careers. ²

     How did these young people decide on music as a possible career?  An interest in music, even a passion for music, is no guarantee of success.  Not everyone pursuing a degree in music will complete the course of study.  Of those who complete their degrees, many of them will not succeed in performance careers. 

Finally, even those people who become professional musicians may find their work far from lucrative.  In order to understand the musician, one must examine their motives.  The motivational theories of Kurt Lewin can help one understand them in the abstract.  Stated simply, Lewin’s theory dictates that, “behavior is a function of the person and his or her environment.”³  Combining this with a careful questioning of musicians regarding their motives can provide a more concrete reference.  Thus, by examining musicians from both perspectives, an individual can better understand them. 

     The authors undertook a short survey of twenty-two professional musicians in order to understand what motivates them.  The survey included questions on upbringing, environment, and individual, professional goals.

     In answering the question, "At what point in your life did you become interested in music?” childhood was the unanimous response.⁴  Author Hans Werner Heymann suggests that childhood training is almost a prerequisite for professional musicians.  While Heymann does not exclude autodidacts from this category, his age limits are well before adulthood.  Training should ideally begin “before one reaches the age of ten.”  The latest they can begin being “before the age of thirteen or fourteen.”⁵

     In countries where the government subsidizes early musical training Heymann’s standards are entirely practical.  Meeting these standards may be more difficult in the United States.

Heymann notes that musical instruction in the United States is "on a private basis.”⁵  Heymann also explains that parents are responsible for arranging childhood music instruction in the U.S.⁵  Thus, musical American youths who receive no help or encouragement from their families are at a substantial disadvantage.

     Our survey reflected this importance of family influence on developing musicians.  Sixty-four percent of respondents indicated that a family member was most influential in developing their musical ability.  Alternately, only seventeen percent indicated a private teacher was most inspirational.  Least influential were school teachers or role models/mentors.  The remaining nineteen percent of respondents split in which of these two groups they considered most influential. Additionally, ninety-five percent of respondents indicated music was a presence in their childhood homes.⁴  The work of prominent researchers supports this conclusion.  One study indicated that the daughters of male musicians were more likely to pursue music themselves.⁶

     While families were a major source of inspiration, they were not, generally, sources of knowledge.  Only nine percent of respondents were either self-taught or taught by members of their families.  Alternately, twenty-seven percent received their primary instruction in school or college. The majority (sixty-four percent) indicated that private instruction was how the received their primary training.  Families may pay for this instruction, but private instructors provide the actual knowledge.⁴

     The criticality of private, professional instruction may be a historically recent development in the United States.  A recent article examining the entry of women into American gospel music suggests this may be case.  Reporter Jewly Hight interviewed Southern Gospel Music Hall of Fame inductee Mary Tom Speer-Reid.  As a member of the long-lived gospel band The Speer Family, Speer-Reid spoke from experience.  She credits her musical beginnings to her father, saying, “That [it] was daddy's heart's desire to have a singing family.”  She continues, “that's the direction he started us in, and that's where we stayed.”⁷  Eva Mae LeFevre, of the gospel group The LeFevres, also credits family as the reason she pursued a musical career.

When asked about how she became involved in gospel music she says that she “married into it."⁷

     All of this suggests that environment plays a great role in determining an individual’s motivation to pursue music.  Thus, part of Lewin’s equation is inarguably correct.  The evidence collected suggests that musical interest is largely the result of environment.  Early exposure, family encouragement, and the availability of lessons are all environmental factors.  None of them are the result of the individual.  This calls into question a basic premise of Lewin’s equation--the importance of the individual.

     While encouraging musical interest, environment may not compel someone to make the leap into professional musicianship.  This then, may be where the importance of the individual is apparent.  What separates the serious hobbyist from the professional?  Ability alone is not necessarily the answer.  The examiner can infer much from examining the circumstances in which musicians decided upon their profession.  The majority (fifty-five percent) indicated that the decided on their career in high school.  A smaller percentage (twenty-seven percent) decided on their career after high school.  Thirteen percent decided on their career in college of graduate school.  Finally, the smallest percentage (nine percent) decided on their career in childhood.  All told, sixty-four percent of respondents had decided on a musical career before college.⁴  While no firm statistics were available on the deciding age of other professions, this appears to be relatively young.  It also advances the possibility of an innate drive towards music.

     With seventy-three percent describing music as a core element of their personality, the influence of the individual suggests itself.⁴  The presence of several personality characteristics in musicians affirms this.  Among these characteristics is a willingness to disregard a key environmental factor--money.  It is possible that a percentage of musicians enter the profession hoping to gain wealth.  This runs contrary to commonly conventional wisdom.  Heymann notes, "the music profession itself is sometimes still seen as a vocation with no money in it."⁵  Heymann’s description as a “vocation,” with its religious connotations is not unique.  In fact, eighty-six percent of respondents described music in just this way, as a “vocation.”⁴

     Given the limited remuneration musicians’ often receive, judging their success in purely financial terms may be unwise.  What, if not money, defines 'success' for a musician?  Psychological fulfillment, notoriety, and professional aptitude--all of these are legitimate candidates for judging a musician’s success. Motivational theorist Kurt Lewin suggested that people are complex systems consisting of interacting, but distinct subsystems.³  With this in mind, the importance of non-monetary rewards appears to merit greater examination.

     When asked what they expected to receive from their musical pursuits, respondents selected “answering to God” as their first priority.  This is well in line with the aforementioned concept “vocation.”  Their second priority was to communicate a message to their audience.  If not as noble a concept as “vocation” this does suggest “communion,” in the philosophical sense.  Finally, “making a living” (not wealth) was the third priority of respondents.⁴

     A critical motivator in the pursuit of a musical career appears to be the pursuit of happiness.  Sixty-eight percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that continued musical performance was critical to their happiness.⁴  Musicians are not the only group to seek fulfilling work, but their willingness to pursue it may be.

Lewin’s Equation and IT Professionals

     While environment influences musicians’ career choice, their strong personal characteristics influence their behavior greatly.  This contrasts with Information Technology (IT) professionals, whose environment influences them more so.  IT workers are not reactive products of their environment, but the workplace has an indisputable effect on them.  Two major trends are having a major impact on this environment.  The first of these is the rise of virtual workplaces. The second is the function of collaboration in the information-based workplace.  The dynamics of both of these factors have environmental effects on workers that necessarily influence their behavior.

     According to Johna Till Johnson, Chief Research Officer at Nemertes Research, there are three key challenges for companies that utilize virtual workplaces.⁸  First is the challenge of implementing management methods that work when all employees are in different locations. Second is the need to develop effective communications procedures for employees in the virtual work environment. Third is the obstacle of how to share effectively knowledge and information in the virtual workplace.  All three of the concerns have environmental implications for workers that affect their behavior.

     Managers must behave differently when distances of 1500 miles, not fifteen feet, separate them from their employees.⁸  Communication in virtual settings also has a pervasive influence on individual behavior.  The use of this technology raises several critical communications questions.  Should the primary means of communication be the telephone, or is email more appropriate?  Does the nature of the information being communicated decide what means of communication are more appropriate?

     The transition to a virtual environment demands new communication styles to ensure its productivity.  The challenges of sharing information in virtual work environments will also necessitate changes in workers’ behavior.  Perhaps, the best way to share information is through an intranet or through programs like Microsoft SharePoint.  Obviously, when a worker cannot transmit information by walking across the building it will influence their behavior.  Technology has enabled musicians to collaborate remotely, but its impact has probably been less substantial.

     Another environmental trend that is affecting the behavior of IT professionals is the nature of digital collaboration. Robert D. Hof reported on the aspects of new collaboration styles in Business Week.  He states, “It's an emerging dynamic variously dubbed mass collaboration, peer production, or ‘crowdsourcing.’”  He continues, “Whatever the name, collective efforts are exploding online--from the volunteer-written reference site Wikipedia to Google's search engine...” Enthusiastic about their potential, Hof describes these technologies as “whole new ways of working.”⁹

     Companies’ continued investments in collaboration technologies suggest a strong demand for them. The PR Newswire recently reported on the upgrades Attunity had made to its InFocus software. The upgraded version of InFocus provides more tools for collaboration and information sharing.¹⁰  The dynamics of global, interactive collaboration affect behavior in much the same way that virtual workplaces do.  This necessitates a shift in worker mentality.  They must learn and adapt to stay competitive in the global labor market opened by collaborative technologies.

     Now, workers must collaborate with people from across the globe.  The Project Manager for a given task may work New York City.  The programmers for the project may live in India, and the Network Analyst, in Salt Lake City.  Ultimately, the project may be destined for a customer in Charleston, South Carolina.  This collaborative environment lends itself to new behavioral patterns for workers. These new behaviors may be unique to workers in virtual environments.  In this way the impact of environment on IT workers differs with its impact on musicians.

     IT workers are more sensitive to technological change than musicians are because IT is technology.  Prior to the innovations of the last century, musicians may have found their professional lives quite different.  Nevertheless, musician, as a profession, did exist.  Prior to the innovations of the last fifty years, IT workers, in the modern sense, did not.  IT is, if only because of its newness, a more volatile field.  

Lewin, IT Professionals, and Musicians

     A comparison between IT professionals and musicians is not common, but it is, nonetheless, worthy of examination.

Interests in music, technology, or a combination of the two draw people into both of these fields.  This makes the comparisons between these different types of workers all the more interesting.  In order to analyze these differences, one need ask a variety of questions.

     Are musicians inherently more or less independent than workers in the Information Technology are?  Software engineer and writer Max Pool notes, “Musicians are artists that can have free spirited impromptu ‘jam sessions’.”  He asks, “When was the last time you saw developer express themselves in free-spirited impromptu ‘code sessions’?”  He states, “Mathematicians (like developers) need to be confined to solving a problem in order to start creating.”¹¹  IT professionals, despite their intelligence, are not artists.  Alternately, some musicians can come up with something brilliant on a whim. IT workers need something--a project or task--in order to complete their goal. Of course, IT professionals can apply creative skill to developing a program or technical solution.  Despite the creative investment, only a few individuals would consider the product of these endeavors art.

     Musicians are more independent than IT professionals are because their continued success is more dependent their creative ability.  This applies to both composers and performers.  The first must be creative in their composition.  The second must be creative in their interpretation.  A musician can be, as one author notes, “habitually creative.”  The author explains that “musician[s] may enter ... into highly personal interpretations of the same piece each day.”¹³  Thus, music affords a regular opportunity for creativity that IT may not.

     Does their dependence on technology make IT workers more sensitive to environment than are musicians?  Lewin’s model goes into some detail on this matter.  His model breaks the process of change into three steps.  The first “Unfreezing,” prepares people for change.  It overrides the tendency to “seek a context in which they have relative safety and feel a sense of control.”¹²

     Pool notes, “In establishing themselves, they [people] attach their sense of identity to their environment.”¹¹  This may be less of a factor for musicians.  Being less attached to a volatile technology or particular place gives them greater flexibility.  Musicians can be creative in any number of places.  They almost certainly have preferences as to where they work.  Preferences are not prerequisites, however. 

     The greater degree of internalization of knowledge also gives musicians greater flexibility.  Even when they cannot play their instruments, a musician can still imagine how a piece of music might sound.  Some of them may even develop complete compositions without touching an instrument.  Alternately, IT professionals usually require equipment in order to work.  They may be able to develop general ideas, but few of them could write and test code in their heads.

     Are the personalities of musicians inherently different from those of IT professionals?  One can ask a similar question about any number of highly trained groups.  Are fighter pilots naturally highly focused, risk-takers with quick reflexes, or does their training make them so?  This question is no less valid than one concerning musicians. 

     The personalities of musicians are, of course, varied.  They may be the outgoing and intensely driven, or they may be shy, introverted people. Author Janis Weller of The Ellison Institute attributes to successful musicians generally useful personality traits.  She states that, “Success in any music career is usually dependent on a high level of persistence, resilience, and self-confidence.”¹³  The lack of these personality traits may hinder otherwise capable musicians, compelling them to quit.

     IT professionals may not need to be as driven or socially oriented.  They are not, necessarily, unsocial or unhappy; however, they may become comfortable around people more gradually.  Despite these differences, workers in both fields should be adept at handling stress.  Both work under time constraints that can be severe.  Additionally, a lack of precision by either group has the potential to embarrass them and harm their professional reputations.

Heymann compares the importance of these two different professions in detail, and notes that both attract mathematically inclined individuals.⁵  He notes that national economies are obviously more dependent upon science and technology than on music.  Nevertheless, this does not debase the value of music.  Without music, a civilization could survive, but it would lack vitality, cultural continuity, and an inordinate overall richness.

Conclusion

     The differences between musicians and IT workers are profound.  The environment, technology, and mentality of both groups differ considerably.  Despite these facts, they also have much in common.  Both professions demand professionalism and grace in stressful situations.  Additionally, they both favor individuals with a mathematical inclination.  As technology further advances one can easily anticipate a further convergence of the two groups.  Musicians already use sophisticated computers to record, edit, and shape their compositions.  Some musicians (particularly in the genres of space music and hip-hop) create songs entirely on computers.  As sound editing and sampling systems continue to develop, this may well become the norm.

     Alternately, IT may demand large numbers of artists in the future.  As tools like Microsoft Visual Basic progress, programmers will have to deal directly with code less often.  Who is to say that programming and other IT tasks may not become so intuitive that they encourage true artistry?  Even now, video game developers employ large numbers of artists.  As games develop into more sophisticated story-telling devices, their creation will certainly become more of an art.

     In the future, contrasts between these two groups may lessen.  For the time being, however, the differences between the two groups are real.  To attempt to be a professional musician requires a degree of boldness that a career in IT does not.  Music also appears to require more early life training, something that private dollars almost entirely subsidize in the United States.  Even in the importance of early life training, there is some similarity between these professions.  While early training is not a prerequisite to an IT professional’s success, it might greatly benefit them.  Lewin asserts, “groups are embedded in a social space that comprises the group itself and its environment.”¹⁵  By immersing IT students into technology early, schools could contribute to their development as a group.  Independent research also suggests the importance of early immersion in music.  More specifically, research suggests that the effects of early life “cultural participation” are substantial.  Researchers define “cultural participation” as an active involvement in art or music, not just a passive interest.¹⁶  Without this participation, musically inclined individuals may not nurture their abilities.

     Developing a complete comparison between these two fields would require many volumes.  Even this brief overview demonstrates the complexity, similarity, and diversity of the motivators of these two groups.  Both demand much of from their practitioners if they are to excel in them these fields.  Both also, by their state of development, indicate much about the society in which they exist.

References

1. “Lewin’s Equation.” Wikipedia; 10 July 2007.  Accessed 9 September 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewin's_Equation. 

2. Lane, D. “Understanding Music Conservatories.” Peabody Institute.  http://www.peabody.jhu.edu/788#html742.  Accessed 10 September 2007.

3. Daniels, V., “Kurt Lewin Notes” Psychology Department at Sonoma State University; 12 December 2003. http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/lewinnotes.html.   Accessed 24 August 2007.

4. Questionnaire developed and administered by the authors.  It consisted of twelve questions regarding musicians’ lives, experiences, and motivations.  Over twenty-three musicians participated.  It was administered between 1 September 2007 and 8 September 2007.

5. Heymann, H. Why Teach Mathematics; 100-105.  Norwell, MA: Springer, 2003.  Accessed from Google Books (http://www.books.google.com)  on 10 September 2007.

6. Miller, B. and Gerard, D. “Family Influences on the Development of Creativity in Children: An Integrative Review.” The Family Coordinator; 295-312; July 1979. Retrieved from the JSTOR (http://www.jstor.org) database, courtesy Trevecca Nazarene U., 20 August 2007.

7. Hight, J. “The Gospel Truth.” Nashville Scene; 26 October 2006.  http://www.nashvillescene.com/Stories/Arts/Music/2006/10/26/The_Gospel_Truth/index.shtml>.  Accessed 28 August 2007

8.  Johnson, J. “Addressing the Challenges in a Virtual Workplace.”  NetworkWorld; 24 April 2007.  http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2007/042407-eye-on-the-carrier.html?page=1.  Accessed 24 August 2007.

9. Hof, R. “The End Of Work As You Know It.” Business Week; 20 August 2007.  http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_34/b4047426.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5>.  Accessed 24 August 2007.

10. “Attunity Provides Immediate Impact on Businesses' Collaborative Working Practices.” PRNewswire; 15 August 2007.  http://www.prnewswire.com/cgibin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-15-2007/0004645870&EDATE= . Accessed 24 August 2007.

11. Pool, M. “Software Engineer vs. Code Artist.”  <http://www.codesqueeze.com/software-engineer-vs-code-artist/>. Accessed 10 September 2007.

12. “Lewin's freeze phases.” Syque Consulting and Publishing Company.  http://changingminds.org/disciplines/change_management/lewin_change/lewin_change.htm.   Accessed 8 September 2007.

13. Dalton, M. “Creativity, Habit, and the Social Products of Creative Action: Revising Joas, Incorporating Bourdieu.” Sociological Theory; Volume 22, Number 4; 603-622; December 2004.  Retrieved from the JSTOR (http://www.jstor.org) database, courtesy Trevecca Nazarene U., 20 August 2007.

14. Levinger, K. “Kurt Lewin's Approach to Conflict and Its  Resolution: A Review with Some Extensions.” The Journal of   Conflict Resolution; 329-339; December 1957.  Retrieved from the JSTOR (http://www.jstor.org) database, courtesy Trevecca Nazarene U., 20 August 2007.

15. Passy, F. and Giugni M. “Life-Spheres, Networks, and Sustained Participation in Social Movements: A Phenomenological Approach to Political Commitment.” Sociological Forum; Volume 15, Number 1; 117-144. March 2000. Retrieved from the JSTOR (http://www.jstor.org)    database, courtesy Trevecca Nazarene U., 19 August 2007.

16. Aschaffenburg, K. and Mass, I.  “Cultural and Educational Careers: The Dynamics of Social Reproduction.” American  Sociological Review; 573-587; August 1997.  Retrieved from the JSTOR (http://www.jstor.org) database, courtesy Trevecca Nazarene U., 17 August 2007.