Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Employee happiness and business success are linked

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 228 posts

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#51

Post by klyrs »

ben_jones wrote: post #33

People are joking in this thread but I think the REALLY BIG problem is that a lot of American workers are increasingly internalizing their compensation needs above other needs like health, happiness, or social well being. When we should be concentrating on a lot of our personal issues, we kick the ball down the road saying "oh when I have more money" or "oh when my career progresses" when we would be much better serv…

It's not just workers. I've repeatedly asked for reduced hours, or more vacation, in lieu of a raise. Every time, my employer's response has been some form of "we can't do that for unspecified technical reasons" or "if you get that, everybody would want it." Honestly I don't get it. The big irony is that several people in the upper strata who are ostensibly making these decisions only work part-time and have at least 2 C-suite jobs

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#52

Post by JJMcJ »

ergothus wrote: post #29

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the tr…

Remember the analysis of Losers/Clueless/Sociopaths in corporate life.

The Losers are low level people who know they have lost the battle to be a big shot.

Clueless are the strivers, the first level or two of management, who think they have a chance to be a big shot.

The Sociopaths actually do have a chance. Not all of them are evil but they all know 100 hour weeks won't do it for them.

Lumbergh in Office Space is classic Clueless. He has surrendered any chance of human contact in his job, but he will never get any higher than he is.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#53

Post by CobrastanJorji »

ergothus wrote: post #29

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the tr…

I agree that there are many companies that ignore this correlation, but I'm not convinced those companies are making the most rational choice.

If Burger King significantly increased the salary of their workers or otherwise found ways to improve their morale, would it benefit Burger King in the long run? I tend to suspect so, but it would be hard to prove.

The burger joints known for taking care of their people are also usually seen as being pretty good burger places, and that may be causal, but it also may be that they're just slightly "upscale" of the other burger places and also spend more on the ingredients.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#54

Post by ergothus »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #53
ergothus wrote: post #29

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the tr…

I agree that there are many companies that ignore this correlation, but I'm not convinced those companies are making the most rational choice. If Burger King significantly increased the salary of their workers or otherwise found ways to improve their morale, would it benefit Burger King in the long run? I tend to suspect so, but it would be hard to prove. The burger joints known for taking care of their people are al…

> I'm not convinced those companies are making the most rational choice

Neither am I - they're just making the common choice.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#55

Post by ergothus »

nine_k wrote: post #40
ergothus wrote: post #29

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the tr…

Why, this makes sense. In every industry, there are employees whose influence on the company success is outsized, and who are hard to hire or train. In software industry, they are experienced engineers and product managers. In a fashionable restaurant, they are experienced cooks. In an airforce, they are experienced pilots and repairmen. Etc. When these people are happy with their work, they achieve great results. Wh…

> There is no incentive for their bosses to walk an extra mile to keep them happ, especially when pressing them a bit more yields an extra bit of performance, so they mostly aren't happy about their jobs

That's the theory - but I don't see the distinction you listed ever proven. People do it because it's the easiest thing, that doesn't make it the best thing. I can just as easily theorycraft that happy employees improve production ACROSS THE BOARD, with lasting and compounding results. The studies that argue this never make the distinction you've listed.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#56

Post by ergothus »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #45
nine_k wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why, this makes sense. In every industry, there are employees whose influence on the company success is outsized, and who are hard to hire or train. In software industry, they are experienced engineers and product managers. In a fashionable restaurant, they are experienced cooks. In an airforce, they are experienced pilots and repairmen. Etc. When these people are happy with their work, they achieve great results. Wh…

Another hypothesis that equally well explains the data: employees at successful companies tend to be happy because the rising tide lifts (almost) all boats. Companies that are doing poorly will tend to look to cut staff, wages, and benefits, which could be a source of unhappiness. Etc. I don't really think the evidence presented here gives much reason to believe that seeking the well-being of your employees will do a…

> Another hypothesis that equally well explains the data

As noted in other comments, this DID check for causation and found employee happiness led the benefits, not the other way around.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#57

Post by clhodapp »

mr_crankypants wrote: post #47
robocat wrote: post #13

They did look at causation: "the authors cite studies of changes within individual firms and organisations which seem to show that improvements in employee morale precede gains in productivity, rather than the other way round." Many of us understand the other causation arrow (corporate unsuccess leads to unhappiness!)

A preceding B does not imply that A causes B, it only implies that B doesn't cause A. Which doesn't really reduce the world of possible causal relationships by all that much, since there may be any number of other factors that weren't considered. For example, it could just as easily be the case that adjustments to dysfunctional aspects of the company's internal politics improve both morale and productivity, but the m…

Sure. There is a subtle difference between "things that make employees happier also improve business performance" and "making employees happier improves business performance", but in both cases you generally want to do things that make employees happy if you want business success (you just might want to be a bit more selective about which happiness-boosting things).

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#58

Post by H8crilA »

Sonnol53 wrote: post #42
ben_jones wrote: post #33

People are joking in this thread but I think the REALLY BIG problem is that a lot of American workers are increasingly internalizing their compensation needs above other needs like health, happiness, or social well being. When we should be concentrating on a lot of our personal issues, we kick the ball down the road saying "oh when I have more money" or "oh when my career progresses" when we would be much better serv…

Compensation is easily measurable and comparable than something like 'happiness' and wellness. I'm definitely not on the company's side for neglecting company happiness, but it so so subjective and it's probably easier for them to set this standard and have people find happiness and balance in their lives.

You can start with true working hours per week. Simple honest rules - checking email at home counts, being paged counts double (because I can happen anytime, so you need to be alert), eating lunch does not. Transit time counts. Divide by 5 - that's your average daily load due to work. You get more than 9 - that's too much, I hope your compensation is superb (i.e. well above average).

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#59

Post by rednerrus »

nine_k wrote: post #40
ergothus wrote: post #29

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the tr…

Why, this makes sense. In every industry, there are employees whose influence on the company success is outsized, and who are hard to hire or train. In software industry, they are experienced engineers and product managers. In a fashionable restaurant, they are experienced cooks. In an airforce, they are experienced pilots and repairmen. Etc. When these people are happy with their work, they achieve great results. Wh…

Look at the success Trader Joe's and Costco have had. Either company could replace the happy, experienced checkers, who care about what they're doing and how they're doing it with $10/hr people who have no stake in what's going on. The important distinction is the stake that your employees take in what's happening.

The people who are closest to and most affected by problems are the best suited to solve them. If you hire a fleet of people who don't care about solving those problems, they won't get solved. You hire a fleet of people who give a shit day in and day out, you're going to get those nagging issues that, in the long run, cost you the most.

Those companies that think that boots on the ground are replaceable in any industry overestimate the importance of management.

I rely on my people to keep me abreast of the issues, as a manager, that I need to be aware of. I expect them to fix the issues that are within their power to fix and escalate the rest of them.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#60

Post by crimsonalucard »

mr_crankypants wrote: post #47
robocat wrote: post #13

They did look at causation: "the authors cite studies of changes within individual firms and organisations which seem to show that improvements in employee morale precede gains in productivity, rather than the other way round." Many of us understand the other causation arrow (corporate unsuccess leads to unhappiness!)

A preceding B does not imply that A causes B, it only implies that B doesn't cause A. Which doesn't really reduce the world of possible causal relationships by all that much, since there may be any number of other factors that weren't considered. For example, it could just as easily be the case that adjustments to dysfunctional aspects of the company's internal politics improve both morale and productivity, but the m…

Correlation does not imply causation.

Little known trick to establish that A causes B is to trigger A at will and see if a B is observed.

If you trigger A 100 times and it precedes a B 98 times then you have established causation to a degree. Similar to the correlation coefficient there must be some causation coefficient.

Post reply on HN