Hi Alvin and the Canada Crew!
To carry on the identity/success debate:
I think mum is right in a lot of respects. The focus of the previous post and the ensuing comments was a little too materialistic orientated. What I was trying to get at was the existence of those people who identify their personal success in life with some degree of success at work, measured in part by their personal work ethic, achievement of firm goals and objectives, personal recognition within the firm, and other factors which could describe 'a job well done'.
However, as before, this all needs to be tempered in light of materialistic influences as well, which is why management accounting is so problematic! Their are just too many variables and too many paradigms to describe the relations between those variables.
As for the working to pay the bills idea, I'm sorry, but thats only for suckers stuck in the rat race (Which if you are one, don't worry, their are plenty of other people with you). Plenty of evidence exists to indicate that motivation of highly skilled and highly paid employees is not determined predominantly by money (Surprising hey!) and that once an employees personal 'comfort thresh-hold' has been reached they will no longer be motivated by pecuniary compensation. Makes you wonder why these CEO's get so many stock options, don't it!
What is a persons comfort-thershold? I'm not sure, but is basicaly a point in life or level in income at which they are no longer concerned with money for survival. Money essentially becomes an object of luxury. So, for all those people in the rat race, its probably half way through retirement when your living on the income of your offfspring. It changes between individuals and varies a great deal and is predominantly lower for disadvantaged famalies/countries. It is hypothesised to have something to do with the reason why poorer society is so often easily satisfied in comparison to western countries (ie no history of consumption or luxury).
As for the body image, I think Magda is correct. Our society is rife with people who achieve a high authoratative status because of their body image. By Authoratative status I mean that they exert an above average influence on society. Eg. Hollywood.
As for body image in the workplace, I wonder if it is a more agreeable theory if we consider it in terms of poor body image. Its unlikely a person with (very)poor body image will achieve a position of authority at work. Yes maybe your boss is overweight, but are they obese? Keep in mind the ideal Body image changes across cultures, Eg. Budha.
2 comments:
The person who tried to email this post to Bob@hot--il.com it didn't work. Please try again and check the email address.
Are you saying you're not stuck in the rat race Damian? I'd like to see you explain that one...
I wouldn't say poorer societies are more easily satisfied, not these days anyway. I understand what you mean by a comfort-threshold, and I agree that it's all relative, but I think awareness is more widespread these days.
By this I mean that many poorer countries are gettin' a look-see at how us 'richer' countries live. They know what we have and they know what they don't have - so how can they possibly be satisfied with the little extra they get, when they are aware that there is much more out there for the taking?
The reason there is no history of consumption or luxury is because the opportunity/resources aren't there, and their culture did not encourage a self-interested or acquistive nature. (I'm generalising majorly here, and basing this all on my own experience and observation rather than any fact).
I mean, there are some cases of consumption and luxury in poorer societies aren't there? Maybe waaayyyy back in their history, before their resources were exploited by the now 'richer' countries. (And, boy I wonder why they're richer??)
Also, if you look at the few individuals from those poorer countries who have been given the opportunity and the resources beyond their normal means and the standard means of their people (I'm thinking here of politicians within those poor societies), then you can see that they act "like children in a lolly shop" (quoted from Dad - thanks Dad).
Um... I know I'm digressing, but even if you look at poorer societies within Oz. In some indigenous communities (ack - I hate generalising like this) there have been problems with excessive drinking.
Or even if you look closer to home at the 'working class' societies in our urban areas. Many of these families have problems with alcohol and gambling. Are they not issues of consumption?
Quite often we will get people in our store who might be living off $250 a week and they buy a cask of wine and a pack of cigarettes every two days.
Okay, so I've fully gone off track now, but that's what happens when you don't edit your comments.
What I really wanted to say is, that comfort-threshold thing is a very complex thing. But mainly, I don't think people from poorer countries are as easily satisfied these days as you might think.
Oh, and in terms of the body image thing - I think I may lose my job soon!
Cheers!
Post a Comment