Engaged or Activated? Interpreting Energy at Work
Feeling more energised at work isn’t always good news. Using a psychological lens, we explore why arousal can feel like motivation - or stress.
TL;DR: “More energised” doesn’t always mean “more motivated”. Sometimes it’s simply higher arousal - and whether that feels good or bad depends on context.
Can your people be simultaneously more energised and less motivated? And is energy at work always an inherently good thing? [
The short answer is: yes, they can - and no, it isn’t.
These questions were prompted by a recent article about Microsoft’s latest employee sentiment results and an internal memo discussing what the organisation is hearing from employees. (
What I found most interesting wasn’t the headline itself, but what it reminds us to do as people leaders: be careful with our language - because language reveals our assumptions about what “good” looks like at work.
So what do we actually mean by “energy” at work?
“Energy” sounds positive. But it’s also vague. In everyday conversation it can mean motivation, excitement, creativity, momentum - the good stuff. And much of the time, it does.
But energy can also show up as anxiety, anger, pressure, restlessness -or a shifting mix of all of the above depending on what’s happening around us.
This is where Reversal Theory is a helpful lens. The observations I’m making here come from the distinction this framework draws between:
Arousal (the physiological “activation” in the body), and
Experience (how we interpret that activation in the moment).
In other words: feeling energised tells us we’re activated - but it doesn’t tell us whether that activation feels good, bad, motivating, or draining.
And it certainly doesn’t tell us if it’s productive.
I remember being told, as a young manager, that I didn’t show enough energy at work; while the people I saw as ‘flapping about’ and even neurotic, were held up as examples.
The same energy can feel good or bad - context decides
When we’re present, focused, and feel a sense of control, higher arousal is often experienced as something positive: excitement, enthusiasm, inspiration, creativity.
When we’re thinking about what might happen next — or replaying what just happened — that same arousal can tip into the uncomfortable end of the spectrum: worry, anxiety, irritation, anger, stress.
So the key point isn’t “energy is good” or “energy is bad”.
It’s this:
Energy is ambiguous. The experience of energy is what matters.
A quick survey‑design note (because it matters)
In the Microsoft example, we don’t know exactly what questions were asked or how “thriving” was calculated. We simply know that their “thriving score” increased, and that this included feeling more “empowered and energised”.
It’s reasonable to assume there were separate items under that umbrella - one capturing energised and one capturing empowered - because bundling two different constructs into one question is a classic survey design trap.
But either way, it brings us back to the same issue: without context, “energised” is hard to interpret.
Why context matters more than the metric
The memo context described in the article is revealing: it points to a period of significant change, with leadership acknowledging both uncertainty and pressure, alongside a need for clearer connection between day‑to‑day work and broader objectives and better support for performance.
And that combination is exactly where “negative energy” can appear.
In a high‑change environment - especially one shaped by uncertainty and evolving expectations - people often become more activated. But if clarity, support, or perceived control aren’t keeping pace, that activation is more likely to be experienced as stress than as sustainable motivation.
This is why people can look “engaged” on the surface — busy, responsive, switched on - while actually moving closer to burnout underneath.
What to take away (and what to watch)
So if you see “energy” rising in your own listening data, I wouldn’t treat it as a win or a worry in isolation. I’d treat it as a prompt to ask better follow‑up questions.
Here are three practical “watch outs”:
- Don’t assume energy = motivation. Energy may be activation driven by uncertainty, not commitment.
- Separate the signal from the story. “Energised” is a signal; the story is whether it’s felt as excitement or as pressure.
- Look for the combination that matters. High energy + low clarity/support is where stress masquerades as momentum.
If there’s one line to hold onto, it’s this:
Rising energy scores are worth paying attention to - but they’re not self‑evidently good news.
Go beyond what your people say.
Understand what drives what they do.
Our Think, Feel, Do approach connects feedback to the beliefs and perceptions shaping behaviour, so you can move past surface measures like energy or engagement and act on what matters most.