Commentary on the Division of Work

This post in the blog will outline some thoughts which the author had concerning the population, specifically in view of the labor force. With high unemployment rates at the time of this writing, it is only natural for the situation to attract speculation. Please note that this piece is not necessarily founded in research but is merely the product of my own observation and speculation.

Motivation versus Application

The two variables which separate the following graph are a) an individual’s intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, and b) their current application of energy.

Subjects are understood to have high intrinsic/low extrinsic motivation when they are driven to achieve for the sake of achievement, and have low intrinsic/high extrinsic motivation when they are driven to achieve for the sake of money or artifacts. This writing is not to judge people for their motivation but must establish the understanding that there is a difference. The author notes that his own motivation scores highly intrinsic.

The application of energy is dictated by one’s contribution to society. If we say that x = resource consumption and y = resource production, then we find the following scenarios. When x > y, the subject nets consumption and is a dependent on the rest of society. When x < y, the subject nets production and is a contributor to the rest of society. “Proper application” of labor/energy produces more than it consumes. The author notes that his own energy seems under-applied at the moment.

Based on these two variables, most members of a society will fall into one of four groups depending on their motivation type and current application of energy.

Before beginning analysis, we ought to recognize the natural human tendency towards work alongside the natural tendency away from too much work. Human nature stagnates without “something to do”, thus the tendency towards meaning and work. However, energy is limited and many factors have led to the exploitation of the working class (factors like the rise of capitalism and the drive towards greater efficiency), which lend themselves to the tendency away from work.

In other words, I find the popular phrase “nobody wants to work” is very often misunderstood. It is rare to find people who don’t want to work. However, it is quite common today to come across people who are frustrated with modern working conditions and objectives.

Analysis

1. Contented dependents. Let us recognize that not all in this grouping are to be criticized. Society has many worthy dependents such as retirees and veterans, those who have contributed to the system and are now reaping the benefits of their world.
   In this camp, though, we do find those unmotivated people who have found themselves in a situation where they can benefit from the system. Very often they may believe that they are “owed” something and are content to be dependent (conservative radio personality Limbaugh refers to this group as the victocrats).

2. Frustrated Dependents. It is within this group that the greatest potential for progress exists. These individuals are intrinsically motivated and likely believe in manifest destiny: that the world can be shaped by their actions. However, due to changing times or unfortunate circumstances, they are in a position where their strengths are unapplied or under-applied. They are looking for their niche in order to become contented producers.
   This group has a powerful metaphorical engine which is stuck in low gear. They may be doctoral candidates who are struggling in an unrelated field. They typically put in extra hours studying and/or working on passion projects.

   The line between Frustrated Dependents and Frustrated Producers is blurry but let us make a distinction based on motivation. The next group is looking for meaning in having things while the previous group is looking for meaning in learning/creating things.

3. Frustrated Producers. This group has found a niche which aligns with their skill set but, due to their tendency towards extrinsic motivation, are unsatisfied. True or not, they may also believe themselves to be victims of a system which favors the historically rich and powerful. This group may resonate with the phrase “boss makes a dollar, I make a dime. That’s why I shit on company time”.
   The significant difference between this group and the previous is their motivation.

4. Contented Contributors. Finally we come to the group who is both intrinsically motivated and have landed in the right application of their energy. They are in their niche and have a metaphorical engine locked in high gear. To continue the analogy, their goals are likely focused towards building the next gear to shift into.

With such an understanding of these general groups, it’s time to make observations.

Observations

We do not want people in the “frustrated” corners. Later we will discuss tactics to shift mentalities and applications to optimize energy.

Some people are legitimate dependents. As discussed above people like retirees and veterans are excusable dependents.

In general, the group of dependents in America will grow. Several factors contribute to this. First is the aging population and vast number of promised government benefits. Similar to the later Roman empire, the status of America as the world superpower means that its citizens will enjoy fruits of its dominance. One must only look at the power and centrality of the US dollar to understand the value other economies place on American business.

Optimization Tactics

This section will explore tactics responding to observation #1: that we want to move people out of the frustrated corners. Ideally, we want the entire population to be contented producers. However, since humanity is a species which experiences time and bodily decay, this is impossible and necessitates a split between producers and dependents. Thus, we actually want a majority of contented producers supporting a minority of contented dependents (who used to be contended producers).

For two cases, we will move people into Group 4. In one case we will attempt to move people into Group 1.

Moving people from Group 2 to Group 4. Creating contended producers out of frustrated dependents is actually the easiest move: they just need the right application. Those in Group 2 already possess the right mentality and motivation but are unsure how or where to apply their energy right.
Let’s note that this group is vast in the 21st century, where changing times and technologies have rendered many jobs relatively useless. In just the past few months I have had several dozen conversations with recently unemployed young men and women who I considered to be dependents. Nearly all seemed sincere as they expressed their frustration in some variety of the phrase “I just want a place to work hard.” This again affirms with me the falsity of the popular statement “Nobody wants to to work”, rather indicating that the problem is in proper application.
Tactics: first is understanding the individual’s strengths with some sort of strengths test, then building connections with organizations which are hiring. Get the engine in higher gear and roaring.

Moving people from Group 3 to Group 4. Converting frustrated producers to contended producers is a bit more difficult and requires either a mindset change or a compensation change. This group might already be in the proper job for their skillset. Important to our strategy is the understanding that this group is more money-focused than achievement-focused.
Tactic #1: increase compensation. Simply give more money to the people who are motivated by money. In theory they will work harder or be happier doing the same amount of work. This is a short-term solution for a larger problem.
Tactic #2: reduce others’ dependencies. This group’s frustration may stem from being overburdened by providing for the dependents. This tactic is dangerous as it can easily enrage those dependents and reduce the popularity of any politicians who suggest it.
Tactic #3: develop a new mindset, one which is interested in betterment and the pursuit of productivity for productivity’s sake. This tactic is as difficult to implement as it is difficult to change someone’s perspective. We’ll see a roundabout way of doing this in a moment.

Moving people from Group 3 to Group 1. Let’s note first that sometimes this transition is natural as people retire. Again, we’re pretty much ignoring retirees in this article’s analysis.
Algebra tells us that two tactics present themselves: an increase of consumption or a decrease of production.
Tactic #1: increase consumption. To balance out the contribution to dependents, this group starts taking more. Economically this is very difficult.
Tactic #2: decrease productivity. The government could ban highly productive jobs in an attempt to “equalize” the playing field and punish outliers/high-achievers.

Quick commentary on Tactic #2: in the author’s opinion, this seems to be a terrible move by any governing body. However, in the long run, the strategy may inadvertently create more frustrated dependents (Group 2) rather than contented dependents. The lack of proper skill application will give may reveal that people don’t actually just want money; they want work which gives meaning. In the long run, a motivated, entrepreneurial workforce will develop which is poised for the application which will boost them into contented producers (Group 4).

Conclusions

Ah, the gift of writing. Through the construction of this blog post it has become clear that the recession and high unemployment following COVID may pivot the American workforce into the most diverse, productive power on earth. Thank you, dear reader, for putting up with this brain dump.