I have been researching the changes in the workplace for 40 years now. The steady move over that time has been away from a situation where employers controlled the development of their “talent” and managed it carefully, especially for white-collar workers, toward arrangements that are much more arms-length where employees are on their own to develop their skills and manage their career. Most employees now see at least some management practices that just don’t make sense even for their own employer–casual approaches to hiring, using “leased employees” and contractors, who are paid more, to do the same work as employees, leaving vacancies open, and so forth.
I wrote...
Our Least Important Asset: Why the Relentless Focus on Finance and Accounting is Bad for Business and Employees
Employers' practices to manage their employees have gotten systematically simpler, cheaper, and worse over time. We don’t pay attention to hiring, we don’t train, we don’t promote from within, we push problems and stress down to the lowest levels. Why is all this happening? One important explanation is that as investor views have become more important, the role of financial accounting and the way it measures success now drives business decisions. Financial accounting sees no value in employees because, under its rules, unless something is owned by the organization, it cannot be an asset, and unless it is an asset, we can’t invest in it. So cut training. Skilled and motivated employees have no accounting value.
This is a classic oral history of jobs in what older people call “the good old days.” It is told from the perspective of the individuals doing the jobs they were talking about, and it reveals how interesting their day-to-day experience is.
The reminder for today, especially in our remote workplaces, is how important relationships with people at work are to our happiness and well-being. It’s also a reminder of how important it is for people to have some control over what they do and to feel invested in their work.
People want to do things well and take pride in what they do. We forget all this when we think of workers as widgets to be optimized.
Perhaps Studs Terkel's best-known book, Working is a compelling, fascinating look at jobs and the people who do them. Consisting of over one hundred interviews conducted with everyone from gravediggers to studio heads, this book provides a timeless snapshot of people's feelings about their working lives, as well as a relevant and lasting look at how work fits into American life.
There is an entire industry that talks very positively and upbeat about finding jobs, and we tend to think of job search as a good thing–good for people and good for organizations–that helps us grow and develop.
Ilana Gershon is an ethnographer, and she moved into groups of people trying to find new jobs. These aren’t the hot-shot computer nerds who happen to have the very specific skills in demand right now; they are average people looking for all the other jobs.
She finds the process is full of snake-oil advice (“find your superpower”!) and false optimism from pop-psychologists who suggest you can just will and network your way to a better job. It is a frustrating process made almost completely opaque by employers who reveal little and provide no feedback to job candidates.
Finding a job used to be simple. You'd show up at an office and ask for an application. A friend would mention a job in their department. Or you'd see an ad in a newspaper and send in your cover letter. Maybe you'd call the company a week later to check in, but the basic approach was easy. And once you got a job, you would stay often for decades. Now ...well, it's complicated. If you want to have a shot at a good job, you need to have a robust profile on LinkdIn. And an enticing personal brand. Or…
Most experts now see 1981 as the key moment when the economy changed: jobs became much less secure, white-collar jobs no longer felt like insiders to the power structure, benefits and wages fell, and income inequality took off.
This book describes the process of moving toward more open-market arrangements in employment. It is largely an explanation driven by events within the US, ultimately political and “private policy” decisions driven by a different view on business obligations.
The economic boom of the 1990s veiled a grim reality: in addition to the growing gap between rich and poor, the gap between good and bad quality jobs was also expanding. The postwar prosperity of the mid-twentieth century had enabled millions of American workers to join the middle class, but as author Arne L. Kalleberg shows, by the 1970s this upward movement had slowed, in part due to the steady disappearance of secure, well-paying industrial jobs. Ever since, precarious employment has been on the rise―paying low wages, offering few benefits, and with virtually no long-term security. Today, the polarization between…
What was arguably the most important factor in driving the different views that business leaders had after 1981 about how they should run their companies? The best answer comes from the dramatically greater role that investors started to play.
Their interests were always different from those of the CEOs and business leaders. The notion that businesses were accountable to “stakeholders”–community, employees, customers, and investors–shifted sharply to the view that there was only one stakeholder: investors.
Why and how this happened is one of the most important stories of the 20th Century and beyond.
The current economic crisis reveals just how central finance has become to American life. Problems with obscure securities created on Wall Street radiated outward to threaten the retirement security of pensioners in Florida and Arizona, the homes and college savings of families in Detroit and Southern California, and ultimately the global economy itself. The American government took on vast new debt to bail out the financial system, while the government-owned investment funds of Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, Malaysia, and China bought up much of what was left of Wall Street. How did we get into this mess, and what does it…
Most of the discussion about whether jobs are good or bad focuses on wages. The sociologists add the concern about uncertainty–will my job last?
What gets far less attention is the fact that the way we manage employees has a direct and profound effect on their mental health and, in turn, on their physical health.
This is a new finding and an important one. We can see a direct effect of bad management practices on employee sickness and death. As documented here, stress kills.
In one survey, 61 percent of employees said that workplace stress had made them sick and 7 percent said they had actually been hospitalized. Job stress costs US employers more than $300 billion annually and may cause 120,000 excess deaths each year. In China, 1 million people a year may be dying from overwork. People are literally dying for a paycheck. And it needs to stop.
In this timely, provocative book, Jeffrey Pfeffer contends that many modern management commonalities such as long work hours, work-family conflict, and economic insecurity are toxic to employees—hurting engagement, increasing turnover, and destroying people’s physical…
My core value is realistic education—learning from each other’s errors and successes, but with full awareness of the difference between the determined past and the uncertain future. We can benefit from uncertainty, which I’ve been doing for a living as an engineer, academic researcher, and inventor. I make use of knowledge and science as much as possible, but I also know that strategic decisions for the uncertain future require skepticism and thinking to deal with the differences in a new circumstance. With my core value, I am passionate about sharing insights and knowledge that our formal education does not provide.
Everything in nature evolves by trial, error, and success—from fundamental physics, through evolution in biology, to how people learn, think, and decide.
This book presents a way of thinking and realistic knowledge that our formal education shuns. Stepping beyond this ignorance, the book shows how to deal with and even benefit from uncertainty by skeptical thinking, strategic decisions, and teamwork based on enlightened self-interests.
This bottom-up thinking is thought-provoking for leaders who wish to build teams rather than herds. The insights in the book will help you to be better prepared for the unexpected, less likely to conform when you shouldn't, more creative, and more likely to learn from both failures and successes of others.
Trial, Error, and Success: 10 Insights into Realistic Knowledge, Thinking, and Emotional Intelligence
Everything in nature evolves by trial, error, and success. They didn't teach you this in school, even though you should know why the rigid laws of physics don't rule nature and don't inhibit your free-will decisions to try, fail, and succeed. As a guide to success, this book shows how skepticism, prudent use of science, and thinking lead to strategic decisions for the uncertain future.
Presenting real-life examples, the thinking in the book combines sharp analyses with broad analogies to show:
How to identify realistic knowledge and avoid harm due to overgeneralized concepts.
How to create new knowledge and solve…
Interested in
business cycles,
oral history,
and
economics?
11,000+ authors have recommended their favorite books and what they love about them.
Browse their picks for the best books about
business cycles,
oral history,
and
economics.
