Skip to main content
The model

The six elements, in plain words.

Think of a good working life as six things it gives you: being good at something, work that matters, a say over your day, people you belong with, a spark that gives you energy, and pay that feels safe. Scientists have studied each of these for decades. Okami watches how AI presses on each one — for you, specifically.

My Competence

Being good at something — and getting to use it.

For example: An electrician's fault-finding instinct; a writer's ear for structure; a nurse reading a patient before the monitor does.

What AI does here · AI's push so far lands mostly on the routine share of a skill — the drafting, not the judgement. The watch-point is whether your craft's core stays yours.

The science — Competence · Self-Determination Theory (basic psychological need)

The need to feel effective — to exercise and extend your skills against real problems.

Reference: Ryan & Deci (2000), American Psychologist 55(1), 68–78

Further: Gagné et al. (2015), EJWOP 24(2) — competence validated as a work-motivation need across nine countries

My Motivating Factors

Work that matters — you can see who it's for.

For example: Wiring a home someone will raise kids in; teaching until the idea visibly lands.

What AI does here · How people respond to AI runs through this element: early research suggests working WITH the tools tends to hold meaning, while avoiding them tends to drain it.

The science — Meaningful work · Work-and-meaning research

Work experienced as significant and serving something beyond the task — who it's for and what it changes.

Reference: Steger, Dik & Duffy (2012), Journal of Career Assessment 20(3), 322–337

Further: Tušl et al. (2024), JOHP 29(2) — meaning validated alongside autonomy, mastery and affiliation in one scale

My level of Autonomy

Having a say — over what you do and how you do it.

For example: Choosing which jobs to take versus working a dispatch queue; deciding how a task gets done, not just doing it.

What AI does here · AI can cut both ways here: tools that free your day lift it; tools that schedule, monitor or queue you press on it. Same technology, opposite directions.

The science — Autonomy · Self-Determination Theory (basic psychological need)

The need to feel your actions are your own — say over what you work on, when, and how.

Reference: Ryan & Deci (2000), American Psychologist 55(1), 68–78

Further: Gagné et al. (2015), EJWOP 24(2) — autonomy is the best-evidenced workplace need in the SDT canon

My Social Connection

The people — who you work with, and who's got your back.

For example: The crew you trust on site; the editor you spar with; the regulars who ask for you by name.

What AI does here · When routine coordination moves to software, some everyday human contact thins out with it. Worth tending on purpose, not by default.

The science — Relatedness · Self-Determination Theory (basic psychological need)

The need to feel connected to others — working relationships that hold, both ways.

Reference: Baumeister & Leary (1995), Psychological Bulletin 117(3), 497–529 · Also: Relatedness in Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Further: Edmondson (1999), Administrative Science Quarterly 44, 350–383 — psychological safety and team learning

My Energy

The spark — work that gives you energy instead of taking it.

For example: Losing an afternoon happily inside a tricky problem and coming out lighter, not drained.

What AI does here · If AI compresses the part of the work that lights you up, the spark needs a new home — that shift shows up here before anywhere else.

One honest note: research treats the spark as the result of the other five being fed — the read-out, not a separate need. Okami tracks it because it's the signal you notice first.

The science — Work engagement · Occupational health psychology

Vigor, dedication and absorption in the work itself — the state flow research calls being carried by the task.

Reference: Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá & Bakker (2002), Journal of Happiness Studies 3, 71–92 · Also: Flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).

Further: Pincus (2022), Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science 57(4), 1223–1255 — engagement unified as motivation, not a separate driver

My Value (€)

The money — what it pays, and how safe that feels.

For example: Your rate, the pipeline of work ahead, and how easily the income could be replaced.

What AI does here · The feeling of insecurity is itself a measured harm — it arrives before any actual job change does. That's why okami reports quiet weeks as quiet, plainly.

One honest note: this one is a different kind of element — an outside condition rather than an inner need. That's why okami reads it from what the work is paid for, not from the tasks themselves.

The science — Economic security · Job-insecurity research

The income the work brings and how secure it feels — insecurity about it is itself a measured stressor.

Reference: De Witte (1999), European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(2), 155–177 · Also: The manifest function of employment (Jahoda, 1982).

Further: Sharif et al. (2025), Acta Psychologica 253, 104733 — three-wave study: job insecurity carries AI's effect on employee outcomes; technostress moderates it

The six elements are not invented for this product. Three are the basic psychological needs of Self-Determination Theory — competence, autonomy and relatedness — one of the most replicated frameworks in work psychology. The other three are well-studied dimensions of working life: meaningful work, work engagement, and economic security. Okami's contribution is the synthesis — reading AI events through these six at once — not the constructs themselves.

Honesty about the science: no single questionnaire combining all six has been validated as one instrument. The closest, the Needs-Based Job Crafting Scale, validates four of these six together (autonomy, mastery, meaning, affiliation) across four countries. The pieces are solid; the six-at-once synthesis is okami's own.

Core framework: Self-Determination TheoryRyan & Deci (2000), American Psychologist 55(1), 68–78

Validation: Gagné et al. (2015), European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 24(2), 178–196 — the Multidimensional Work Motivation Scale, validated with 3,435 workers in seven languages and nine countries

Validation: Tušl et al. (2024), Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 29(2), 57–71 — the Needs-Based Job Crafting Scale (autonomy, mastery, meaning, affiliation validated together)

Okami is a synthesis built on these constructs, not a validated psychometric instrument of its own — the references ground the constructs, and the reading stays plain-language.

Ready to see your own shape? Start with your profile · or read how Okami works.