Dennis Paull wrote: How do we value things and the people who make them? Thomas: An 11 word question could take a book to answer. Perhaps if we assign the meaning to value in this context as appreciate, then we can say that if anyone appreciates something someone has made, then they have given it a value. What I see has happened in my lifetime is the meaning of value has been monetized and is always being compared rather than appreciated. It is often being compared to what TV or Hollywood has decided is the accepted standard. I belong to a church and I watch the church choir - it is a good choir and the choirmaster puts in an amount of time way beyond what the church can pay for his services. The people who sing obviously give up a night a week to practice and on Sunday, they are working while the rest of us are enjoying. We have several people who sing professionally but in this choir they are not given solo duties at the expense of others and so we have not developed a "star" quality to our choir. I believe they continue to belong to the choir because they feel appreciated and because it allows them to enjoy what is enjoyable to them and for them, the sacrifice of giving up Sunday mornings and an evening is not a sacrifice but a time of appreciation to the choirmaster and the other members who are mutually interdependent. In the workplace, when I was younger, my boss would ask me for a favour, could I come in early, would I finish a piece of work, would I help out another employee. The asking was a form of appreciation. Often there was no extra pay, no promotional ladder climbing, no favour currying, just an honest request for me do something that would help the business or the project or the boss and I was rewarded by the knowledge that I had been asked and that my contribution was appreciated. At the same time, I was given an opportunity to say no, I had other obligations or that I did not want to do the extra and my reasons were considered and discussed. Today, with management having absorbed the ideas of productivity, I am no longer asked, I am told and if I should for some reason protest, I am putting myself in opposition to the great cause. Obviously, I am not a team player, I am not committed to the bottom line, I do not understand that I am a slave and that I could be put on the auction block, the next time a cut is planned. My work is not appreciated, it is taken for granted. My extra's in care and prevention of the owners customers, equipment and reputation are not rewarded if it conflict's in any way with the employers perception of productivity. My job is considered a gift that the employer gives me, not a partnership in a mutual endeavor that benefits me, him and the customer. I think we have to give up "bigness" to bring value back into life. Bigness, whether an army, a university, a company or whatever, seems to diminish the players. I resent the idea that the employer is always looking for the "best" rather than being concerned about improving the individual. As employees, we are always being held up to the standard of the employee of the month or the Phd, or the bosses remembrance of his activities before he became a boss. That is not how I remember the good jobs I have had. The good jobs I have had have treated me like an individual, given me respect and asked for my help. In other words, there was a person, boss, or coworker who was allowed to appreciate my role, to acknowledge my strengths and deal with my weaknesses. I was not a number or and accountants entry or a cost. Respectfully, Thomas Lunde
