« The Disability Pay Gap: Earnings or Total Compensation? | Main | Titles and Pay - External Necessity Vs Internal Parity »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

While I feel that "over-communicating feedback" may be impossible, Derek, I agree that valuing work by clock-time is highly dysfunctional in most modern employment situations.

Can't recall many cases where employees complained about too much feedback from management; more rather than less communication is generally needed. Still, the more important the work, the longer the time required to confirm its adequacy. There are massive obstacles to continual feedback on results, so process adequacy may have to be the proxy.

Better metrics for the work experience will be an even bigger challenge. Many institutions with vast political and regulatory power are deeply invested in status quo time measures that ignore output quality, quantity or costs. Sweeping social change may be required to shift attention from "how long did it take" to "how good was it." Otherwise, management may be required to impose even more draconian controls over work processes to assure their efficiency in the absence of more sensible worker autonomy efforts complicated by time-based laws.

I have no doubt that there would be an explosion of innovative approaches to this and many other aspects of employment relationships if the dead hand of government regulation was removed.
Some would argue that in such case there would be a considerable temptation for unscrupulous employers to exploit the most fungible, least able, and least mobile employees. I agree that finding non-regulatory ways to protect such powerless people would be a thorny problem. But that does not mean it would be unsolvable.

The comments to this entry are closed.