For-profit companies are designed to acquire employees who work as much as possible in their designated role while being paid as little as possible.
That is not true. Companies are interested in maximizing the value of their employees. If the company knows that paying an individual more will result in a greater increase in company value, it'd be in their interest to pay that individual more -- or give them more perks, holidays, reduced hours, whatever.
Good management is interested in maximizing productivity. But if their only approach is more hours and less pay, they suck at their job and the company's directors/officers should be looking to replace the managers.
Currently a senior technical writer for AWS IoT. Previously: professor of Technical Communication, Programmer/Writer, Software Developer, Air Force officer, & Electronics Technician.
Sadly, the relationship between for-profit companies and good management is not 1:1.
Companies might honestly be interested in maximizing the value of their employees, but managers often have more focused goals, which, when optimized to the extreme, can result in what the paradox the article describes.
Thanks for the comment. I do not agree that great companies do this. I think most companies are incentivized toward this. So it's easier to fall into this trap. Better ones realize this and create a long-lasting culture with much needed employee loyalty.
Hi thanks. I didn't say good companies or managements. I did think in general most of them (the way they are financially positioned) are incentivized to slip into this bad territory. It's like the case that if most people wake up one day with a superpower, they are incentivized to do bad things. But some will still manage to become responsible and emerge a superhero. Doesn't mean they have to, but it's easy.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
That is not true. Companies are interested in maximizing the value of their employees. If the company knows that paying an individual more will result in a greater increase in company value, it'd be in their interest to pay that individual more -- or give them more perks, holidays, reduced hours, whatever.
Good management is interested in maximizing productivity. But if their only approach is more hours and less pay, they suck at their job and the company's directors/officers should be looking to replace the managers.
Sadly, the relationship between for-profit companies and good management is not 1:1.
Companies might honestly be interested in maximizing the value of their employees, but managers often have more focused goals, which, when optimized to the extreme, can result in what the paradox the article describes.
Thanks for the comment. I do not agree that great companies do this. I think most companies are incentivized toward this. So it's easier to fall into this trap. Better ones realize this and create a long-lasting culture with much needed employee loyalty.
Hi thanks. I didn't say good companies or managements. I did think in general most of them (the way they are financially positioned) are incentivized to slip into this bad territory. It's like the case that if most people wake up one day with a superpower, they are incentivized to do bad things. But some will still manage to become responsible and emerge a superhero. Doesn't mean they have to, but it's easy.