The blog about nothing

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

This model of life

How on earth did the present model of life evolve? It appears flawed in not inconsiderable ways. This post will touch upon one of the more popular models; the one based on employment. Employment, job, work, career-call it what you will-is at the core of this model. By that I mean more than 50% of waking hours of those living this model is consumed by the employment factor.

Employment typically takes place in organizations. The goal of an organization is to maximize shareholder wealth. I am not going to examine that goal. Looking at things from an employee perspective, I find that organizations function on mind bogglingly flawed principles.

The goals of each individual employee-the basic unit that constitutes an organization-are widely varied. Most often one employee can attain his goal only at the expense of the other. In short, this is a zero-sum game. How can a zero-sum gum make everyone happy? Should we all not be a part of something that can make everyone satisfied, at least in theory? Not only are the individual employee goals not aligned with each other but there is no goal congruence between an organization and its employees as well. For example, organizations want to cut costs. One way of achieving this end would be to downsize or reduce employee compensation. But, this will make the employee unhappy and there is a direct conflict of interests.

Further, power and decision making, which are very critical to the organization tend to be distributed on an arbitrary basis. Less competent people get to make decisions for no better a reason than because they happened to join the organization before more competent people. Organizations just perpetuate a non meritrocratic hierarchy leading to a frustratingly non optimal use of it’s precious human resources. There are far many more fundamental flaws in this set up and I don’t see how can it can ever be satisfactory.

I am sure that there are plenty of happy and satisfied workers all around the world. However, the average worker is at so many points in his career reduced to a demotivated, complaining, whining malcontent. Nearly everyone I know looks forward to the weekend. If this model was any good, would people not be looking forward to the week?

Yet people continue to be employed because employment is the center of a greater model of life. A model that seems to revolve around the concept that stability is the most desirable thing in life. The underlying assumption that stability is the most desirable thing is highly questionable. But, this model pushes you into believing that safety, stability and security are the bedrock of human existence. Not only this, it thrusts the concept of what is desirable and undesirable upon us without giving us a moment to think about it.

At its worst, this model crushes the spirit, destroys the soul and sucks the joy out of existence and is nothing but a trap. I would go so far as to say that it is a trap that makes people forget the existence of a soul and a spirit and turns them into Microsoft office suite wielding automatons.

It leaves you pursuing things without truly comprehending what attaining these things will do for you. This is a model that fails to impress upon people the diminishing marginal utility of money and material things. I am a huge fan of money and material things. I am as pro MT as the next person. But, the concept of diminishing marginal utility applies. There is only so much of stuff that anyone needs. After a point, it is pointless to chase stuff. But, once you start it is hard to stop.

This model is so cleverly designed to sustain itself through the concept of security, that it has a thousand nay sayers questioning the wisdom of people who have the courage to break out. They will be relentlessly worked upon until they are browbeaten into submission; their spirits are crushed and they are firmly entrapped.

Should life not be about what you really like to do? I am alive to the fact that it is not always possible to do what I like. There is the question of a roof over my head and feeding myself. But, surely this is not the only way to answer these questions.

The basic principle of life should be about exploring one’s potential as a human being and maximizing it (obviously assuming that it is done in a moral and ethical way); about knowing what activities bring joy and pleasure and in working towards maximizing the time spent in these activities. I ask not even for a model where I can act upon my thoughts but merely the freedom to think, the opportunity to look inwards and to find my true self.

This model lets you live ‘a’ life. But, it so often comes in the way of leading ‘the’ life.

**This post is for one of the four loyal readers, the one in Spain; Until I actually write something more substantial, please make do with this.

6 Comments:

At 1:48 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

You know something...i think along similar lines at times- but then fall into the category of those who get pacified by momentary appreciation and ignore the larger reason why they were restless in the first place....i sometimes feel that life seems to be running smoothly- and we are so engroosed with trying to make sure that it does...machinery is well oiled etc etc- but fail to really answer the bigger question- is it moving in the right direction- to the destination we want...Its like you're on a treadmill in life- running to stay in the same spot and all consumed by trying to do that- but heading where exactly?? So i guess sooner than later will come the time to get off the treadmill and REVIEW if the wagon of life is on the right track in the FIRST place.. (there should be a word limit for comments for people like me ...ha,ha) but there you have it Meera. Bravo!!

 
At 2:48 AM, Blogger RN said...

Really, really interesting stuff. I see *someone's* been lost in reflection! Thought-provoking, too.

I have to say, I'm not quite sure what you say in this passage (which I think is at the heart of what you're trying to say):

"Yet people continue to be employed because employment is the center of a greater model of life. A model that seems to revolve around the concept that stability is the most desirable thing in life."


I'm not entirely sure it can be generalised beyond a point.

You're absolutely right - one's employment is representative of one's life. I think it's important to recognise, however, two things: firstly, the fact that a person's *attitude* towards his employment is also representative of his life, as much as his employment is; and second, the power of choice involved here - however diminished, or however strong.

Let me amplify.

You may choose employment, because you are motivated by a need for stability. In that case, a stable job does represent how central the concept of stability is in the larger model of your life. Why do you need stability? Lots of reasons - may be you've had an unstable life so far, and want stability now; may be you've had children, and you like them very much, and you want to give them a solid base; may be your parents are sick, and you need to pay for their medication for the next ten years; may be you're just plain cowardly, and would prefer the safety of the mundane.

The point to remember here, however, is the fact that it *is* a choice - one among many. You've got a menu of motivations, here, which you get to place at the heart of your "life model": you may choose to prioritise stability; you may choose to prioritise adventure; you may choose to prioritise pleasure; you may choose to prioritise moral impact.
Whatever you prioritise, and centralise in your "life model", will be represented throughout it - and, yes, in your employment.

Sometimes, you are driven more strongly towards one particular option, by forces beyond your control (you want to study at Harvard, but your mother's fallen sick, so you give up on the dream so as to be able to look after her). The final choice is still yours, however, and reflects your own internal priorities (your mother's well being means more to you than the glamour - or substance - of Harvard).

And that's only the first level! Take two chaps, A and B, who work for a really bad BPO, doing the night shift, for three years. The first one just wants the money, he needs to pay his bills, and his parents want him to work, so he does it. The second one wants to study at B-school so that he can become an entrepreneur, but can't afford tuition costs - so he works, so that he can save some money up to pay for that education - and the exciting new opportunities for him. His horrible BPO job, is, therefore, a means to an end.

I would say the first guy is trapped in that soul-killing prison you talk about in your post. The second probably is not. The difference, here, is the attitude towards the employment. The employment is the same for both people; the attitude is not, and the results will not be the same, either.

That attitude reflects choice, too. You choose your attitude - or at least have some level of choice over it.

I think the scenario you are talking about is true - but only as one of a set of possibilities, rather than being a general truth.

I think the hell you are talking about in your post takes place when an individual completely defaults on his power of choice. Such a person ends up, as you say, " pursuing things without truly comprehending what attaining these things will do for you." That is the mentality of the robot. Person A, in my example, answers fifty horrible American credit card holders every day as part of what becomes a tedious routine. Person B does the same horrible job as part of a road to a glittering, exciting future.

Person B may not, of course, be as fortunate as, say, Person C, who is the son of a steel baron and who can afford to do the exciting stuff right away because he doesn't need the employment. He is not, however, as unfortunate as Person A considers himself to be.

Now you know why I go on so much about The Matrix movies! :-D

Beautiful post, Meera. You really have opened the door on something important, here. Brilliant stuff.

 
At 2:50 AM, Blogger RN said...

Oh, and by the way, if you're talking about organisation/employee congruence at the workplace, you may want to take a look at this:

http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_abstract.aspx?ar=1963&l2=18&l3=31&srid=110&gp=0

 
At 12:41 AM, Blogger cynicalcount said...

Meera I am sorry to say but most of your posts remind me of Shankar's movies. Its the same stuff being recycled in using different adjectives and some creative usage of prose. Its like a screenplay being done differently but the basic story remains the same. You have posted on similar lines even when you started to blog so its been a running theme i guess in your posts. I am not saying there have not been some really creative posts but as i mentioned most come into the bracket of sameness. Anyways, atleast you blog that is a good thing.

 
At 9:26 AM, Blogger Aarthi Krishnan said...

hey meera! cool write-up! i totally agree. i cud completely relate to what you are saying. the whole sytem of employment does seem quite warped!

 
At 10:02 PM, Blogger sukanyav said...

Hey Meera!Looks like you are enjoying your trip out there.Where all did you visit other than Paris?How is periamma?

My 2 cents on employment...blessed are the ones with jobs as an extension of their hobbies.But given a choice(and the lifestyle!) most people would pursue what they love to do than toiling away precious time and energy at workplace!
V also shares the same view and he would also happily sit at home if given "the lifestyle"

 

Post a Comment

<< Home