I almost didn’t write this post because it’s on the surface more negative than I like to be, but here I am anyway because the first step in fixing a problem is recognizing it.
You’ve probably heard the “lead by example” line before. It’s something parents especially struggle with because young children do follow their parents’ examples, often the ones that are not intended. For example, we have this great story about my husband trying to work on his swearing and when he finally succeeded (in that moment) our two-year-old son filled in the blank with perfect timing and intonation. Well, I recently found an article on how we work, and how we should work, that really struck me. I included it in my interesting links list (it’ll show up at some point), but decided to share it with one friend right then.
The article talks about how the American work ethic and culture has evolved into something unsustainable, and potentially disastrous. It looks at the concept of working harder and longer as the only way to get ahead when all the latest research shows productivity over time gets lower and less successful the longer hours people work.
How does this type of work ethic and work philosophy tie in to the lead by example? Well, I can’t help wondering what example we’re giving to our children, and whether that has some connection to the large number of teenagers who don’t have a sense of what they want to do “when they grow up.”
It’s generally accepted, with the exception of the lucky few, that high school is a time of challenges, a time of physical changes, a socially competitive environment, and many other euphemisms that boil down to a rough time even without bullying, pranks, and false witnessing.
So why do we tell kids to “enjoy it while it lasts” and “it only gets harder from here on out?”
What examples are we giving that make them optimistic about their adult life? How are they supposed to be charged about taking on the world when what they see is the adults in their lives stressed, working long hours, having no time for relaxation, angry, frustrated, etc? And in the current economic times, they see people working longer hours often for less pay.
It’s easy to turn the blame all on the younger generation, to call them lazy and unwilling to commit the time and energy to their future.
It’s easy to keep trudging the same road we’ve set ourselves on where adults mainline caffeine, eat at their desks if at all, and do 30 minutes on a treadmill instead of finding time to hike in the real world.
There was a time when kids were hungry for education, when good work was tied into raises and recognition, when people came home to sit down with their families and talk about their days rather than zoning in front of the television.
I’m not talking about some imagined golden time. I’m talking about in my lifetime. I’m talking about what I observe in myself and in the people around me.
I’m a workaholic. I come by it naturally as my father is too. It used to be we were the rare ones. Now everyone is a workaholic whether natural or forced.
I’m a natural multitasker too. As is my son. But now there’s all this research showing that multitasking is actually less productive and a bad idea. That it doesn’t actually exist as a functional concept. This ignores the existence of the natural folks entirely, turns them into “liars,” in favor of helping the majority.
Our culture has taken the odd balls and turned them into the expected norm. It’s created an artificial society where everyone is a workaholic; everyone is expected to do 50 things at once and excel at it. Then we wonder why so many are disaffected. Why we have fewer skilled folks because they don’t see the incentives, especially in a time where jobs are scarce and pay is lower.
I don’t have any answers. Again, I’m just full of questions. But I think in examining these questions maybe we can start to find answers.
So, what are your thoughts?
RSS - Posts
I learned (the hard way) in my twenties that you can only achieve an income boost with overtime to a certain point. Well, I was in the military and on a salary, but my ex-husband was on an hourly wage, and he’d work OT to achieve an increase in income. Except, if you didn’t get the OT, it caused problems. And, of course, you can only work so much OT. It’s a finite source. That experience taught me the limits of “hard work” and “long hours.” That approach will help, but it will only take you so far. Then you have to come up with something else.
In the early 90s, I was on the staff of a military school established to teach our senior leadership to be a little more savvy about technology — those leaders hadn’t had the benefit of growing up with the technology the way today’s do, and we had to teach them things like “a million lines of code” isn’t necessarily a good thing. You need to ask what those million lines of code accomplish, and is it toward the purpose for which you are paying. That, of course, reminded me that throwing more of anything at a project isn’t necessarily better. It’s a matter of whether that more is being smartly applied. You may pay more per coder, but if they are experienced coders who know how to make the most of a line (i.e. Margaret), you will be able to invest less time to get the same or better results as having a lot of cheaper, less experienced coders (i.e. Jean). Eventually the less experienced coders may gain the knowledge and experience of the more experienced, but do you want them doing it on your dime and at the expense of your project? Maybe. Maybe not.
And, yes, the example parents set for their children regarding the parents work lives and careers does, I think, have an impact. My sister worked hard at her day job and invested her evenings and weekends to earn first her undergraduate and then her graduate degree, but her daughter doesn’t see the value in it. My sister’s family still struggles mightily financially (what her daughter doesn’t see is some of the other reasons for that, and it’s impolite to point out the daughter’s father, my sister’s husband, is more a contributor to that than my sister’s education), so the daughter doesn’t see the value of school. She’s essentially dropped out of high school, and now that she’s 18, I doubt she’ll finish. I’m sure, at some point, she’ll see the hardship this will cause her, and she may seek a GED and perhaps some other education that will allow her a better financial future than she is facing now. But, you’re right. She’s seen her mother work her fingers to the bone to keep a job with health insurance and a reasonable wage to handle their significant health needs only to have the position be eliminated at the end of April this year. I don’t know how to articulate that her mother’s diligence and education have gotten her this far, even though it’s inadequate for a family of five with one wage-earner.
In some ways, what I’ve witnessed in this situation is being repeated across the nation. How much does it relate to my observation in 1978 that parents in the future would be hard-pressed to provide a better life for their children than they themselves had had? I think parents today are struggling to provide as good a life as they had growing up, and that may contribute to the disaffectation you observe. It’s hard for parents to tell their children their lives can be better when they can’t see it for themselves. Part of this is the definition of what is “better.” Is better more things? Or is it the quality of life you mentioned early in your article? There’s a reason a movement is afoot to find a less cluttered lifestyle, and quality of life is one of those reasons, and it may be a key toward finding what we’re really looking for.
You know, I’m torn. There are a lot of people I know that don’t work overtime and they still complain they can’t spend time with their families. Some folks work overitme once in a while because the company doesn’t want to pay for that. There are people that balance their family/home life and work with overtime successfully. I have come across folks that don’t work overtime and they were also slackers. And you can guess, someone somewhere had to pick up the slack for those people. Maybe the problem comes down to what people want out of life and a dose not overspending. Eveyone’s idea of success is different.
Excellent post, Mar. And excellent comment, Jean.
I don’t know what the answer is. I know I’ve often been the victim of the flip side of the attitude you’re describing: if it comes easily, it must not be real or good. If the words pour out, then I’m not a real writer, I’m just a dilettante.
Thanks for your comments all three of you. Yes, it’s a complex question and is not as simple as just this because there are people who manage it successfully while there are others who whatever they do will not help either economically or quality of life wise. There are too many factors going in to any piece of it.
The other one of those “better life than your parents” thing is the more educated than your parents. That worked out well when people were coming out of families that had never finished high school or never gone to college, but for those with parents with graduate degrees, it sets an unachievable standard.
Which brings it back to what Maripat is saying with the expectation, and then to Bonnie on the if it’s easy it’s not worth anything. I’m not talking so much about the individuals as the cultural standpoint in my post, but the cultural affects all of us, sometimes by sparking rebellion, but more often by training us to want what is out of reach. So, if the culture can change, maybe people will be more ready to define quality of life by some measure beyond the bank book or how high the names are on the corporate ladder.