On Sat, 10 Feb 2007, Tayssir John Gabbour wrote:
> Management lit is full of anecdotes of employees who do crazy amounts
> of useful work, outside of necessity. (For whatever individual
> reasons.)
>
> Many prefer uncompensated work, which is a luxury enjoyed by people
> with sufficient privilege. Same with self-directed work.
This is common in academic settings; the administrators work 80-100 hour work weeks year round, and the faculty they "supervise" work 30-40 hours a week 173 days of the year. One obvious factor that reinforces this pattern: union representation and job descriptions. Our faculty's job description was negotiated and includes specific, enumerated job duties. The administrators' job descriptions were created by the College many years ago (probably by top-level administrators) and include pretty much any work activities that are vaguely relevant to the administrative position. --And I love this: they are also expected to do "other duties as assigned". Picking up dry cleaning for the college president? Sexual favors for promising foundation donors? I guess that's all just part of the job!
The faculty often wonder why people would work under these conditions. Is it just money? Formal authority in a bureaucratic organization? I've been interacting with college administrators a lot as union president, and there's also something else going on. The administrators perceive themselves as self-sacrificing, noble servants of the college, in constrast to the self-serving, union-protected faculty. By working 100 hours a week, they reinforce their moral superiority compared to their subordinates who work union- regulated hours.
I know this is probably a lot different in corporate settings, but I think these bizarrely long work weeks really do tend to function--in the circles of upper management--as a kind of moral imprimatur.
Miles