Before we accept the notion that organizations should focus on keeping “good” workers and let the rest go, maybe we should ask ourselves what “good” means?

What is “good work?” What does a “good” employee do that others don’t? It may seem like a silly question, but it’s the silly questions that are often the most penetrating ones.

In the context of an organization, which of these best defines “good” work?

• Work that’s technically or professionally good, in the sense that it displays high levels of expertise and skill.
• Work that’s good for the organization — probably because it produces high levels of profit.
• Work that’s good for society, in that it contributes to the long-term benefit of the greatest number of people.
• Work that complies with the prevailing moral code: for example, it’s honest, complies with all laws, respects others’ needs, and does not offend society’s norms of behavior.

I think you can see where I’m going with this.

Incompatible requirements

Items 1 and 2 in this list are often mutually incompatible, especially in macho organizations, where technical and professional aspirations count for little against increasing quarterly profits.

Items 2 and 3 frequently fight, since “society” is, at best, a fairly abstract concept and there are wide disagreements about what precisely contributes most to the common good — or if the common good outweighs individual freedom or corporate profit.

Despite all the belief systems that claim morals are, in some way, fixed and “everlasting,” they change all the time. Even amongst the most conservative sectors of society, what is seen as morally desirable today is very different from what it was 100 years ago — and what it will be in the future. This item is also frequently at odds with item 2; sometimes also with item 1.

I haven’t even included other potential definitions of “good” in organizational terms, like: “works hard, doesn’t complain, and never rocks the boat.” Or “makes me (the boss) look good — especially when I’ve just goofed.”

Where will you compromise?

Before you start jumping to conclusions about what’s “good” for your career, your organization, or your life as a whole, take some time out to think about what you actually mean.

If, as I suspect, you find that you mean several, probably incompatible, things, take a little more time to work out which aspects of “good” you’re prepared to compromise or throw away.

It won’t solve all your dilemmas, but it may make you more understanding of others; and less likely to assume that you already know who’s “good” around your place of work and who is not.

Photo credit: kikashi

[ratings]

Technorati Tags: good work, good employees, good working practices, setting standards, corporate norms, judging performance, priorities, doing what is right, knowing yourself, empathy, judgment, judging performance