As the “Great Reshuffling” continues to roil labor markets, labor economists and pundits continue to debate the causes of labor churn. There seems to be an ever changing number of reasons for the labor churn that we’re currently experiencing. From disillusionment with both the “rat race” and “hustle culture”, re-evaluation of personal and professional priorities, and even changing economic conditions brought about by the pandemic, many individuals are wondering if their current professional lives are worth the hassle and expense as it relates to their personal happiness and development.
Indeed, if one were to categorize all the demands that employees are making of their employers, the majority of those demands are related to personal needs and desires that have arisen to the forefront thanks to the pandemic. Whether it is remote work flexibility, better work culture and more meaningful work, employees are increasingly demanding their employers treat them less like widgets and more like individual human beings. One could argue that the trend was a long time in coming.
The push for more efficiency and productivity has been a corporate mantra for most of the late 20th century and the early 21st century. Increasing output, reducing costs and increasing speed to market, are some of the many objectives that executives have been stressing to their organizations.
While increasing productivity and reducing costs have benefited humanity through a greater cost of living, it has not only come at a cost but has not necessarily been accomplished via the most effective means. Indeed, the pushback that we are seeing amongst employees is as a result of applying antiquated practices without acknowledging the availability of new technologies and methods.
There is no doubt that in the 21st century we have continued to refine the people management processes that were developed in the 20th century. Whether it is time motion studies to help optimize employee movement or the addition of machinery to improve overall individual productivity, the majority of the past century’s work related innovations have been related to the optimization of individual productivity. While strides continue to be made with respect to individual productivity optimization, it is possible that we have reached the end of dramatic gains from this perspective.
Indeed, the “Great Reshuffling” has demonstrated that we may have pushed the limits of individual productivity optimization beyond reasonable human limits. Whether it is the “996 culture” from China or the “hustle culture” of Silicon Valley, the vision of work prior to the pandemic was one that wholly devoted the individual to work and reduced personal life to a mere trifle. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, the pandemic has caused many to rethink whether the slavish devotion to work is realistic or wanted.
There is no doubt that “996 culture” or “hustle culture” is due to the general desire of individuals to get to where they want to be faster than the pace they are achieving. There is no doubt that startups have proven over the past several decades that the slow speed of society doesn’t have to be tolerated and has been tolerated for far too long.
Indeed, startups have proven that society only has itself to blame for its slowness. There are a number of factors from societal inertia and bureaucracy to an unwillingness to accept change is good. Startups have partially overcome this slowness but not by addressing the root problems but merely working through them.
One could argue that the startup community has deluded itself into believing it is not only moving fast but in an innovative manner. There is no doubt that startups have moved fast and that can be seen with their speed to market.
The question, though, is how much have startups merely just pushed through existing processes via sheer will versus actually leveraging efficient processes. The unfortunate reality is that startups have leveraged sheer will and that avenue has run out of steam.
The “Great Reshuffling” has made individuals realize “996 culture” and “hustle culture” are needlessly burning out individuals. They are realizing that they are being asked to push themselves to the extreme while dealing with antiquated and inefficient processes. And individuals are dead tired of it.
This is why individuals are starting to re-evaluate what they really want out of life in general. They are prioritizing individually what they consider optimal divisions between professional and personal with a greater emphasis on personal.
What personal means to every individual differs but at the same time there are common themes. A few of those common themes include greater flexibility and more freedom to pursue their personal interests and endeavors.
While there are some who question this pursuit of greater flexibility and freedom, there are others who believe it is the right choice for everyone involved. Indeed, if one looks at the current state of both society and the economy, there is a desperate need to provide said flexibility and freedom.
We as a society and an economy are at an inflection point when it comes to the next stage of innovation and creativity. It is necessary to address systemic issues that have plagued both society and the economy to continue to advance. Indeed, we can no longer expect the “996 culture” or the “hustle culture” to be able to power innovation any further.
Hopefully, the demands by individuals for greater flexibility and freedom will provide the impetus we as a society need to create and innovate, particularly when it comes to the fundamental process and system issues that face us today. Indeed, “quick fixes” will not address these issues. These are issues that require deep analysis and continuous effort to find the most effective solutions.
As such, we need all individuals to take the time and effort to come up with creative and innovative solutions that we need to drive the next evolution of the global economy. With that in mind, we need to consider the demands of individuals for greater flexibility and freedom as not only push back against antiquated and inefficient processes but setting the stage for the next stage of global economic evolution.
Leave a Reply