The Value in Jobs

Don Boudreaux over at Cafe Hayek, one of my favorite blogs, had a post yesterday titled Creating Value.  It is ostensibly an introduction to a new book by Charles Koch, CEO of Koch Industries, titled The Science of Success.  That just-published book has received praise from a wide variety of big company CEO's like Rob Walton of Wal-Mart, investors like T. Boone Pickens, and even a Nobel laureate in economics... so it's no wonder it ranks slightly higher than my first book, Evolving Excellence.  Even if I don't exactly consider some of those companies and individuals models of excellence.

However it's not Koch's book that I'm interested in, but instead the first couple paragraphs of Boudreaux's post on value.

There are two kinds of people in the world.  Members of the first group think of jobs as being rather like boxes, each of which has a monetary figure on it as well as a set of levers inside.  A job-holder occupies a box, yanks on the box's levers, and in return receives pay in the amount of the prescribed monetary figure.  Lucky workers are those who land in boxes paying big money and whose levers are easy to manipulate; unlucky workers are those who find themselves in boxes paying little money and whose levers are difficult to manipulate.

That's an interesting way of describing what is unfortunately the majority of workers.  I have a small problem with that description, but first let's read what he says about the other kind of people.

The second group of people in the world understand that real jobs are a matter of creating value for buyers.  The greater the amount of value I create for others, the better -- or, at least, the higher-paying -- is my job.  In markets, your job isn't a box that you get assigned to; your job is an opportunity to perform, to help improve the lives of others and, in return, to persuade these others to help you improve your life.

Those are obviously the people lucky enough to work in a lean environment... an environment focused on creating value from the perspective of the customer.  The problem I have with the first statement, and indirectly with the second statement, is the concept that "the workers think of their jobs..."  and that it is written from the perspective of the worker.  I don't buy that.  The workers are to varying degrees intelligent and creative, but they still operate within a framework and structure created by their leadership.  It is the job of the leadership to show that they are valued, that they can use their brains to help create customer value, and to provide the tools to help them accomplish those objectives.  Boudreaux does end up with some similar thoughts.

And one of the most important of these performances is corporate management -- the ability to coordinate large amounts of resources, time, and workers in ways that create large amounts of value for others and that makes it easier for those of us with less vision and administrative ability to find jobs that maximize the value that each of us, individually, creates for others.

True.  However I think it is the most important factor, not a concluding "and."  A Burger King can unleash more creative power than a large high tech factory if the right leaders are in place who understand how to get the juices flowing and leverage the value of knowledge and creativity. 

This is why the success or failure of a lean manufacturing or lean enterprise transformation hinges on the commitment of top leadership.  Without the patience for an often difficult journey and a vision of excellence that is shared continually with all employees, the transformation will probably fail.

Comments

[david foster]

"Lucky workers are those who land in boxes paying big money and whose levers are easy to manipulate"...this is simplistic. In jobs above the lowest levels, the "levers" aren't clearly marked with big labels; you have to search them out. I have seen lots of people in jobs where they had levers available to them that they never used because they never bothered to find them.

You are of course correct about the importance of leadership...for any given level of leadership, though, there will be a big difference between the accomplishments of employees, based on their individual initiative and creativity.

[Katherine Radeka]

"This is why the success or failure of a lean manufacturing or lean enterprise transformation hinges on the commitment of top leadership. Without the patience for an often difficult journey and a vision of excellence that is shared continually with all employees, the transformation will probably fail."

This is a great point. However, patience is not enough.

Top leaders need to create clear connections between the investment that the organization will make to undertake the journey and the expected return - in both customer value and business terms. Without that clear connection, the effort is vulnerable to the whims of the executive team, who may not always remember in the difficult times why they decided to undertake this journey.

[Richard Silkey]

This might be a bit simplisitc but I think it rings true. Coming from a blue collar family my father toiled for years in a dead end job that made him a decent wage. There was no desire to move up the corporate ladder. That dead end job lasted 37 years.

Today the possibility of having a career with one company for that length of time is, well, impossible. That is mainly due to no loyalty from the employer as well as the employee. My father sort of fits the description of the worker in the box. Back during my father's heyday that was the norm. You go out, look for work, get a job, work for X number of years and then retire. Jobs were not viewed as an entrepreneurship. They were viewed as just jobs. That was your career. So, they were the workers in a box who settled for that type of existance. And, they believed that that was the way to make your living, or career. That was your value, time spent working for a paticular employer.

With the advancement of technology came a whole new way of looking at careers and value. People began to believe, and rightfully so, that in order to do better they had to think out side that box. In other words, they had to find ways to market themselves, to be of higher value to a prospective client (employer). They had to become entrepreneurs in selling their skills.

Those people who have learned that skills and ability are what sell, "you", as a product are the ones who think outside that box. If you are a worker who desires more than just a weekly paycheck you create something of greater value than just being one of the bees.

I believe the levers that the writer eluded to are really skills in being able to manipulate awarness of one's value. Sure, you can get a job and make a certain salary and hope that you work for a long time. However, with todays world market careers are fleeting at best and to create real value means you have to be in demand. It also shows the relationship to lean thinking. Reinventing oneself is akin to understanding that being lean requires stripping away old habits and creating a persona with little baggage which adds value.

In closing, I find that the need to create value is a never ending game. The process of value will always evolve like lean manufacturing. And, it has the potential to be created for either good or bad intent.