* for Irkcaro Amnek, from Hult International Business School
A great philosopher of the Twentieth Century, Hannah Arendt, once underlined: Men´s imagination is always one step forward over the factual world. Indeed, Men are always dreaming higher and farther than the actual state of things. She has also pointed out that we - as human beings - are a joint of Labour, Work, and Political Acts (Action). These elements are, respectively, the activities of biological maintenance (Labour); artefact production - objects whose existence will overlap our own(Work); and dialogue and linguistic interaction among people (Action).
Still chasing after her doctrine, we are experiencing a one of a kind blend of the above mentioned characters of ours. Today, nonetheless, the boundaries among them, especially between Labour itself and Work are fading onto themselves, and, thus, the virtual outcome is a feeling that our efforts in our jobs does not render anything.
What does keep you alive nowadays?
The answer varies, but all bunch of commodities you enumerated silently to yourself has one single denominator: money. Everybody works for money on any field anywhere around the globe. Yes, I know, motivation really counts on, but as the daily routine come along impetuously... is your purpose ever mentioned? All that you have laced therewith are vain speeches from your boss and ´department coaches´. This is neither a particular guilt duly charged by Modernity, nor by Arendt, who only and humbly, identified it. Even less by Karl Marx that went out on the problem´s roots, reaching the codenamed "Alienation Process": the kidnap of the very ultimate result of any man´s work from his hands due to specialization.
The greatest corporative problem that emerges itself before the CEOs today, in respect of Labour´s dominance is: how to recover the transformational feature of work in spite of Modern Alienation and Labour´s triumph? The answer is so simple that seems barely believable: remuneration methods. A foolish query that rules in syndicates and companies is continuously the numerous ways of changing remuneration aspects, whose effects, in the end, just alters the comprehension of Money itself. Such expedients have been generating two malefic implications:
1) the feeling of non-productive duties is growing up faster; and,
2) taken concepts are invading real but still concealed alternatives, mocking their effectiveness whether new alternatives claims for new concepts for their rationalization.
The Economist has just published an article entitled "Hating what you do". The textual development did not surprised me: just a repetition of fallacies in diagnosing this working turmoil. However, a certain conclusion awake from it: "There are some people, particularly in Europe, who think that it strengthens the case for expanding workers’ rights. But doing so will not end the upheaval wrought by technological innovation in the telecoms sector or overcapacity in the car industry". Yes, absolutely. Pumping up an already existing factor can balance the tactics board but will not change the entire background. The password is, more than ever, Innovation. Not a pauperised understanding thereof, but on a real and reinvented path to follow. We named the cause of such discontentment with help of Arendt, who perceived firstly this invasion and interpenetration of Labour and Work into each other. The last has been deprived from its original meaning in society. How to retrieve the primordial status of Workers? How to re-distinguish them, securely, from someone who just earns money? Bearing just this pattern in mind, it would be not an absurd to put beggars and workers at the same ground - both earns money, and depending on the circumstances, beggars surmounts types of work.
Thus, what could be done?
Once enterprises will go forth upon their fields, products and services, the answer does not lay within. Specialization will gain impulse year after year; alienation is eternal and irremediable. The solution flashes out from remuneration methods. The stock market has proved that money could not exist at all, and one anonymous subject can be changed into a millionaire without possessing no real money. The price to be paid for labour, working hours are immeasurable because indeed, it is mould from the initial motivation for work, for money. In a literate signification, we were talking about "dreams". And we will not gather monetary value available for purchasing them in any sphere - individual and less in collective whatsoever. If not everyone would die for their dream, they surely will live for them.
The new-age consultant has the challenge to identify personal goals and aiming achievements inside the soul of employees. Of course legislation avoids quid pro quo or barter, but there is always an unendingly part of remuneration that surmounts the protected minimum. Though this manager´s lifeline were going to raise disbursements, who can guarantee, on the other hand, that profits would not reach the stars?
And you, are you ready for sell your money for dreams?
No comments:
Post a Comment