On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
> "No competition" clauses have been quite common in professions where
> intellectual property is at stake. They actually offer some protection to
> prospective employees or consultants from mining their ideas by
> unscrupulous employers or partners. What I find surprising is the use of
> that clause in semi-professional jobs where no intellectual property is at
> stake, hairdressers, drivers etc. The most ludicrous example of it that
> I've seen was someone I knew working for a fast food chain and having to
> sign a "no competition" clause. I wonder what the rationale behind it is.
> It actually costs money to enforce such contracts, they need to retain an
> attorney to do this, and I do not see any obvious financial benefits to the
> employer.
>
> One possible explanation can be found in the "organizational isomorphism"
> theory of organizational behavior. This theory maintains that under
> certain conditions organizations copy cat other organizations perceived as
> "successful models" in a field and thus become more an mode alike. A
> corollary to this theory is that managers are often clueless idiots who do
> not know what they are doing, but they are very concerned about creating
> appearances of their competence. Mimicking "successful models" is a
> Dilbert-like strategy of creating professional appearances while being
> clueless. The spread of "no compete" contracts to areas where they serve
> so seemingly useful purpose may be a result of such managerial copy cat
> behavior.
>
> Any other thoughts?
>
>
> --
> Wojtek
>
> "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."
>
-- Wojtek
"An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."