Harvard Business School has a newsletter with an interesting article Why Your Employees Are Losing Motivation. This particularly stood out:
To maintain the enthusiasm employees bring to their jobs initially, management must understand the three sets of goals that the great majority of workers seek from their work - and then satisfy those goals:To maintain an enthusiastic workforce, management must meet all three goals. Indeed, employees who work for companies where just one of these factors is missing are three times less enthusiastic than workers at companies where all elements are present.
- Equity: To be respected and to be treated fairly in areas such as pay, benefits, and job security.
- Achievement: To be proud of one's job, accomplishments, and employer.
- Camaraderie: To have good, productive relationships with fellow employees.
The entire article is informative and worth a read. It seems to gel nicely with the three things I realise that I'm looking for in a job:
Frustratingly, despite having a consistent idea of what I want, I've not done very well in finding it. Please don't depress me by telling me that it doesn't exist.
Re:Why people really work
nicholas on 2006-04-16T19:49:20
I don't think they even implied that people would still work if they didn't get paid. The next paragraph after the extract I quoted was:
One goal cannot be substituted for another. Improved recognition cannot replace better pay, money cannot substitute for taking pride in a job well done, and pride alone will not pay the mortgage.and there's another comment later on re-inforcing that something they're describing isn't a substitute for paying people properly.
Re:Why people really work
bluto on 2006-04-17T16:34:54
100% correct -- "H" stands for Harvard, but the rest doesn't stand for "Business School".I'm convinced that pay is the elephant that many managers want to ignore, so they invent other reasons to justify their title. Our dev team just lost a great team leader mainly due to pay. He was one of the few managment types I've ever seen actually know how to lead (he's a former Army captain). He "only" had a BSCS, and so according to the "rules", which appear on paper as well defined and equitable, they couldn't justify paying him anywhere near as much as other team leaders or even some team members. To add to the foolshness, they didn't even offer him a token raise to stay, which probably was in their ability. At least that would have kept team morale from sinking to the bottom since they could claimed they tried but it was out of their hands.
Re:Why people really work
ask on 2006-04-17T17:25:42
I'm convinced that pay is the elephant that many managers want to ignore, so they invent other reasons to justify their title. Our dev team just lost a great team leader mainly due to pay.
When I've done salary-ish full time work sometimes I've wanted more pay, but really it has always been a (bad) proxy for something else being wrong that it was harder to get the manager to fix.
"More money" would help for a few months, but it can only suppress the real problem for so long.
- askRe:Why people really work
bluto on 2006-04-17T22:36:50
"More money" would help for a few months, but it can only suppress the real problem for so long.I agree, if money is being used as a band-aid it is only effective for a limited time. If money is used to award merit, it tends to have some results.
One reason why I said he was "great" was because he didn't waffle under recently increasing pressure from above - a quality few have. One might say he just couldn't handle management's normal eccentricities and should step down. After hearing about the inane crap he had to deal with recently, and knowing his character, I don't believe it. Would money just postpone the inevitable? Perhaps, but even in that case perhaps management would have woken up in time and stopped acting merely as a preasure conduit, and he'd still be around.
Proof in the pudding, I guess
Aristotle on 2006-04-17T20:36:55
You contradict yourself. If money was that important, why did morale sink to the bottom when the guy left? Noone’s salary changed.
Re:Proof in the pudding, I guess
bluto on 2006-04-17T22:04:48
I never said salary was all important. I said it was his reason for leaving. In his case I had to agree. Morale always goes down when your management rigidly follows rules, and ignores common sense.Rather a shallow view
Aristotle on 2006-04-17T20:31:06
So you’d leave your position at Stonehenge to work as a roofer if you could make more money that way?
Re:Rather a shallow view
brian_d_foy on 2006-04-17T20:43:09
It's not really a shallow view. It's just a recognition that people work for other reasons than work.
You can't use me as an example, though, because I'm stupid. I keep doing what I do because I'm not primarily motivated by money. That it's not true for me doesn't mean it isn't true for other people.
You have to remember, though, that even a very well paying job that you don't like is not going to motivate you. If I could make ten times as much money roofing as doing Perl, I still wouldn't do it because I don't like being a roofer, even with all the great benefits those guys get.
And that's exactly my point. We aren't motivated for the things that we get from work. You misunderstand if you think it's about money. I never mentioned money. It just so happens that money is the thing you need to have food and shelter and to take care of your family, at least in the US. If I were interested in just making money, I'd sell my soul to some Wall Street firm. Instead, I'm working in open source and doing a lot of things that don't reward me with money.
Re:Rather a shallow view
Aristotle on 2006-04-17T21:58:49
Ok, now I’m confused. You seem to be saying the opposite of what you were saying in your previous comment. Maybe we’re just having a confusion of terms.
Re:Rather a shallow view
brian_d_foy on 2006-04-17T23:18:47
Yes, it's a confusion in terms. I wasn't talking about money, but you equated paying bills and providing for your family with money. They aren't the same thing.
Re:Go South young man
nicholas on 2006-04-16T20:31:14
Also I seem to remember from one of your photos (although I can't find it now) that although there might be penguins outside your window, and penguins on the walls of your office, there aren't any penguins inside your computer. Windows desktops are something I don't like working on, and have successfully avoided for almost 6 years now. I think I'd go mad if I were forced to use Windows for 10 months with no chance of escape.
Re:Go South young man
rhesa on 2006-04-16T22:19:24
I'm sure you've seen it, but: http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20041011;) Re:Go South young man
Aristotle on 2006-04-17T20:34:08
Yeah, me too. Having to use Windows drives me batty. Long-term it would make me seriously unhappy. If I were in such a position, I would accept a significant pay cut just to avoid having to touch Windows.
