I see your point about taking that pay cut for increased happiness at work, but I think there’s one more issue here: If John leaves his frustrating, hellish and stressful but highly paid job for one that is much nicer but with a lower salary, this may affect the living standard of his family. Sure.

But now that John comes home fresh, happy and energized after an 8-hour work day (as opposed to angry, tired and stressed after a 10-hour one), his family may well find it a wonderful trade-off.

I think we invest way too much faith in the power of consumerism to make us happy, even though all pscychological studies show that, no, that 45″ flat-screen TV will not make us any happier. At all.

I agree with you completely on the necessity of motivating each person differently. What makes Ed happy will make Jane terribly unhappy and vice versa. I really like your point about “making sure that the compensation packages I offered to recruits addressed all of the stakeholders in the decision making process”.

As for the tasks that no one likes: They might be fewer than we think. When we allow people to choose for themselves the tasks they like to do, there will probably always be some left over, but often surprisingly few. I wrote about it here:
http://positivesharing.com/2006/08/lets-lose-the-job-descriptions

It’s just not compatible with a consumption oriented culture, where people become happy in their lives by acquiring objects, which helps them set their status/feed their ego relative to others.

As the president of a small consulting company, I have seen radically different motivations from people whose goals in life have been set to provide for others, versus those who are free to “self-actualize” or whatever. While it doesn’t necessarily change what they want out of a daily work environment, that definitely becomes a secondary priority. If the work environment is bad, they may leave, but as long as it’s okay, it allows them to satisfy the other important decision makers in their life. One of the most important things I learned from “Hiring the Best” ( http://www.jrothman.com/books.html ) was to make sure that the compensation packages I offered to recruits addressed all of the stakeholders in the decision making process, whether that means the wife who is worried about the job stability of her husband working at smaller firm, or a single mother that needs lots of time flexibility, you have to look at the whole family…

I think the other aspect is that there are jobs that almost no one enjoys, but nonetheless have to be done. The way to get people to do these jobs is to attach money or status to them. For example, most of what a “manager” ends up doing in a lot of organizations is easier and more boring than what someone in a more purely creative role might do. However, the status and money that come with the job make it worthwhile.

Nathan: Nice Buddha analogy :o)

Victoire: Thanks for the link, that is an EXCELLENT article!

“When it comes to receiving information and providing feedback, employees prefer hearing it from their direct managers or supervisors. They also prefer having their managers come to their desks to sit and chat about work.”

Let me offer an anology between the two types of companies. A good company would offer the Buddha the most nurturing environment possible so that the Buddha could obtain nirvana. A bad company would expect this at a rock concert.