Understanding your AQai Character traits—and when to flex them—is key for navigating change with confidence.
One of the most revealing insights from the AQai Adaptability Assessment is Motivational Style—whether you naturally lean toward playing to win or playing to protect. This subdimension of Character highlights how you approach opportunities and uncertainty: do you act boldly to seize the win, or cautiously to safeguard against risk?
We’re seeing these motivational styles play out in real time with the rapid adoption of AI in the workplace.
AI is changing everything about the way we live and work. It shows incredible promise to accelerate and alleviate some of the most mundane, menial tasks, and there’s an entire industry of applications and custom “GPTs” being deployed in organizations in every sector.
As a result, many leaders are moving full steam ahead with AI tools, believing that, if they want to win against the competition, they must move quickly to embrace AI or risk getting left behind. They don’t have time to ask a million questions. They want to move—NOW.
Yet others—especially cybersecurity leaders—are very concerned. And rightfully so. AI tools can introduce a tremendous amount of risk, especially when they’re connected with proprietary company data like customer databases, procurement/supply chain systems or production platforms. Their instinct is to protect the company—even if it means resisting the use of AI altogether.
“Clearly neither of these extremes is the best option,” said Competitive Edge CEO Krista Sheets. “Adopting AI with a no-holds-barred approach is too risky, but so is moving too slowly and cautiously. The right answer is finding a balance.”
Of course, that balance is contextual and based on the circumstances. In some cases, it’s smart to take some calculated risks. In others, it’s just not worth it, and unfortunately, there’s no standard rule or policy that can be applied to every situation.
Your organization and your team need to be able to adapt depending on the situation.
Sound familiar?
The AI conundrum is just one example of how Motivational Style, like all Adaptability traits, can be both an asset and a liability depending on the context. That is why understanding how your individual and organizational style manifests with an AQai Adaptability Assessment can help leaders build more balanced, adaptable teams that are better equipped to navigate complexity and change.
What is Motivational Style?
Motivational Style is a measure of how a person is intrinsically driven when faced with uncertainty, a challenge, or an opportunity. It’s based on Regulatory Focus Theory, which has two main systems: “promotion” (maximizing opportunities) and “prevention” (fulfilling duties and minimizing errors).
The AQme Assessment measures an individual’s natural tendencies on a continuum from “play to protect”–motivated by acting cautiously to preserve what’s working and avoid unnecessary risk–to “play to win”–motivated by potential gains to take bold, opportunistic action to get ahead.
As we’ve recently covered, Adaptability traits exist on a spectrum. There is no right or wrong. While some traits can have negative consequences in the extreme, the goal in building Adaptability Intelligence is not about scoring high or low. It’s about self-awareness and situational alignment.
In this case, both motivational styles can be powerful strengths, and both can become liabilities when taken to extremes or applied out of context.
Understanding your own motivational tendencies—and those of your team—with an Adaptability Assessment can help you spot when a bold move is needed, when caution is wise, and when your instincts might need to be dialed up or down.
“Play to Win” = Pursue opportunity at all costs
People with a “play to win” mindset are typically proactive, competitive and goal oriented. They thrive on possibility and often take bold action in the face of risk.
This approach is characterized by the innovators, the visionaries and the entrepreneurs—it’s vital for accelerating innovation and responding quickly to time-sensitive opportunities. It’s also useful for inspiring teams with vision and ambition. And in many ways, this mindset or style is romanticized in our culture. We admire and revere the unbridled passion.
The flipside is that it can also mean rushing into decisions without a full analysis of the risk, or overcommitting resources in the eagerness to tackle the challenge. People who are hard-core play to win types can sometimes ignore risks or feedback, charging ahead at all costs.
In real life, this might be a marketing VP who aggressively pushes for a product launch to outpace competitors. Or a salesperson promising things to a customer without verifying the company can actually deliver. This play-to-win energy pushes boundaries, but it also puts the company at risk.
“Play to Protect” = Cautious and Conservative
“Play to protect” individuals are guided by the desire to preserve and safeguard. They are thoughtful, cautious, and risk aware—perhaps even risk averse. They often act as the voice of reason in high-stakes situations.
This approach is vital for managing compliance and regulation requirements, mitigating risks in volatile markets and for protecting long-term stability.
But these individuals can also fall into the trap of overanalyzing and delaying decisions and sometimes suffer from analysis paralysis. They’re more likely to avoid change—even if it’s necessary—and are less likely to seize on timely opportunities because their cautious approach has them looking for the “gotcha” or the “catch” at every turn.
The cybersecurity executive who is suspicious and uber cautious about AI is the perfect example. They might postpone implementing it within the company because of uncertainty around privacy or security concerns. But their caution causes the company to lag behind competitors.
The Value of Balance
Organizations need both risk-takers and risk-managers to be successful. “Play to win” styles drive momentum; “play to protect” styles ensure stability. Too much of either can lead to imbalance:
● All gas, no brakes leads to chaos, burnout, and strategic missteps.
● All brakes, no gas creates stagnation, risk aversion and missed opportunities.
Plenty of evidence has shown that diversity is the key to business success. In fact, a 2017 report by Cloverpop found that diverse teams—including thinking styles and risk orientation—make better decisions 87% of the time.
Finding Your Sweet Spot
But just like grit or resilience, motivational style isn’t fixed—it flexes based on the situation. An Adaptability Assessment can help people understand where they are, and based on this benchmark, great leaders can help their people recognize when to lean into their default style, and when to adapt.
For example, if you’re a “Play to Win” leader, watch for signals you may be moving too fast. Are your decisions short on data or are you dismissing naysayers without considering their viewpoint? Is your team showing signs of burnout? Or worse–rebellion?
Simply slowing down can help offset these potentially negative consequences. Use scenario workshops to evaluate what could go wrong before launching a project. Ask “What’s the risk if we don’t pause and ask some deeper questions?” Consider appointing a “devil’s advocate” in meetings and team discussions to challenge assumptions.
If you’re a “Play to Protect” leader, be mindful of signs you’re being overly cautious. Are projects stalling because of analysis paralysis? Are you defaulting to “no” too quickly? Are you avoiding change or moving forward because it’s uncomfortable? Are you overly concerned about your budget being broken by unplanned needs? Or do you bristle or balk when asked to divert resources to new projects out of fear it will take away from existing obligations?
To balance their risk-averse tendencies, when considering a new initiative—like an AI implementation—a “play to protect” leader could commit to a “pilot” or trial period rather than a full rollout to lower the perceived risk. They might invite a “play to win” style individual to co-lead initiatives to achieve balance. Finally, they might ask themselves, “What opportunity are we missing by being too cautious?”
Motivational Agility is the Real Goal
The goal of discovering motivational style through the AQai Adaptability Assessment isn’t to eliminate these differences. The goal is to normalize the tension and highlight how different styles contribute to team success.
“Just like every other aspect of Adaptability, motivational style is a toolset, not a scorecard,” Sheets said. “The real power lies in uncovering your natural patterns, recognizing when they’re helping vs. hurting and how to get past your own blindspots. It’s about knowing when to be bold and when to be cautious. When to seize and when to safeguard.”
The AQai Adaptability Assessment helps teams develop this awareness. It gives organizations a standardized language to discuss these tendencies openly and constructively—without judgment.
So, whether you’re a risk-taker or a natural stabilizer, remember: Adaptability is all about context. And the most adaptable teams are those that can flex together.
To learn how to identify, explore and leverage the motivational styles within your team, get started with an AQai Assessment today!