How workers view the three layers.
Fifty full-time employees anonymously completed a questionnaire on the three dimensions of INR: their motivations at work, their personal narratives, and their behavior under pressure. A first exploration of how these layers can be measured in width.
What you find below.
What we investigated
Whether the three layers of INR are arranged widthwise to measure later, and how a group of workers views each layer.
What we saw
The layer of motives measures within this group strong and coherent. Behavior under pressure correlates reasonably well.
What it means
The narrative layer cannot yet be captured as a single measurable entity. We are further developing the questionnaire.
Three layers, twenty-seven propositions.
The questionnaire was structured in three parts, one per layer. Participants indicated on a seven-point scale the extent to which each statement applied to them, from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
We deliberately chose an anonymous format for full-time workers. Anonymity gives people the freedom to answer honestly, even when responding to statements about their behavior under pressure. The questionnaire measures how people to look at oneself, not how they actually behave. That distinction is important for what the outcomes can and cannot say.
The I-layer
Work Motivations: room to make your own choices, feeling competent, and connection with colleagues.
The N-layer
The story about yourself: how you explain your own behavior and the conclusions you draw from it.
The R-layer
Behavior Under Pressure: How to Respond When Tension, Uncertainty, or Resistance Arise.
How coherent is each layer measuring?
A layer is considered to be well-measured when the individual statements within that layer address the same underlying question. We express this degree of coherence below. The fuller the bar, the stronger the arguments hold together as one, within this group of fifty.
The I-layer, work drivers
Strongly coherentThe nine propositions about autonomy, competence, and connection form a clear, coherent whole. This group also experiences a lot of freedom and appreciation in their work. This is the strongest finding of the study.
The R-layer, behavior under pressure
Reasonably coherentThe eight statements about behavior under pressure are reasonably interconnected. For an exploratory assessment, that is a useful result. Behavior under pressure is, by its very nature, more personal and varied than a basic need, and that is reflected in the results.
The N-Layer: The Story of Yourself
In door developmentThe ten statements about narrative do not yet form a coherent whole. Upon closer inspection, it became clear that they measure different things all at once: self-perception, rationalization, social influence, and avoidance. These are psychologically distinct concepts. This questionnaire therefore needs to be refined.
Why we show the N-layer open
We could have easily omitted the weak correlation of the N-layer. We are consciously not doing that. A model that takes itself seriously also shows where the measurement is not yet complete. It is precisely this distinction that safeguards the credibility of what is strong.
The low correlation means not that the narrative, as a concept, is incorrect. The narrative is at the heart of INR. What the survey shows is that this specific set of ten statements does not yet accurately capture the narrative. The measurement method needs refinement, not the idea behind it. We’re working on that, with more precise statements that measure one thing at a time.
Where a broad questionnaire does not yet capture the narrative, a deeper study shows that it can indeed be unlocked. Not by measuring, but by allowing people to engage with it themselves through a strict protocol.
What this study doesn't say
- It's an exploration, not a validation. Fifty participants with tentative statements provide an initial picture. That is different from a fully validated measurement tool.
- It measures self-perception, not behavior. The questionnaire captures how people see themselves. Whether they actually behave that way has not been measured by it.
- It says nothing about correlation or causation. This is a snapshot. This study cannot show whether one layer controls the other.
- The group is not representative. The participants registered anonymously via an open link. We do not know if they represent a cross-section of all working people.
Motivations can be measured. The narrative demands more research.
Within this group, the layer of motivations measures strongly and cohesively, and behavior under pressure reasonably well. The narrative layer cannot yet be captured in a single measurement. That is precisely the open question that our deeper study seeks to answer.