Employee Pathways

Some of the ideas expressed in a few recent posts have collided with a workplace incident that leads me to a few observations about effective resource management and employee empowerment - it's not a topic I consider very often, but worth jotting down a few notes to bring things together should I shift my interests in that direction:

The workplace incident is a coworker who is struggling to get the equipment and software that he believes will enable the design staff to be more efficient and effective in their work. This is more of an ongoing situation, as I've run into the same issue before where a request for software was declined or obfuscated to the point where I've given up trying and come to accept that the culture of my current employer is a night-and-day difference from my former one. I think we would disagree on the exact number of times a person should bash their skull against a brick wall before accepting that it's not going to give - and I do try to be supportive than discouraging of his efforts, as my naive streak of optimism hasn't quite been crushed by the corporate machine and I'm genuinely hopeful to see someone else succeed where I have failed.

This takes me back to a previous meditation on the notion of the ethics of a person who purchases goods for use by others, and the degree to which they seek to use their power of decision to compel the ultimate user of a product to accept an option that's not quite sufficient for the sake of saving money. The satisfaction that a user derives from the consumption of a consumer good is highly subjective, and easily dismissed as being unimportant - the person who expects better quality is merely being unreasonable and fussy and should be happy with what they get.

But when translated into the context of an employee who claims a need for tools to do his work, it would seem to be a more objective case - that the benefit of having better resources is not merely the personal satisfaction that can be gained merely from using them, but in the satisfaction that comes from a job well done - having the right tools to do things the right way results in a better outcome for employer and consumer alike.

And yet, the authority of those who control corporate budgets places them in a position to decide what tools others "need" to do their jobs - without any understanding of the work that they do, and an understanding only of the cost of the tools. It doesn't help that people in such positions are often encouraged to cut costs and do things as cheaply as possible. But such is the nature of things.

This also calls to mind a more recent post about user pathways, in which I reasoned that a better user experience could be achieved not by restricting consumer behavior, but by accommodating it. This also seems to have some relevance to the employee who seeks to do his job in a different way than the employer prescribes it should be done. In effect, by preventing a user from choosing his own path, the company is forcing them to take a less efficient route. When a customer comes in contact with a vendor with such an attitude, they generally are frustrated by the experience and are likely to seek another vendor. When an employee comes into contact with an employer who takes the same attitude, they are likewise frustrated - and while, in times where the labor market favors the employer, such employees must be content to middle through, they will eventually consider the possibility of finding another employer that encourages and enables them to do their work.

Ultimately, the consequence of "employee experience" has a significant impact on customer experience - especially in cases such as this one, where the workers in question are those who design the user experience. The employee who lacks the tools and resources to do their job well necessarily does a poorer job for want of them. Because the employee is seeking to be more effective and efficient in his work, greater consideration should be given to the possibility that he is not seeking personal satisfaction from a consumer good, but to achieve benefits that would have a positive effect on the company, as the efficiency and effectiveness of the worker yields a better product for the consumer.

All things considered, I don't see that this meditation offers any valuable insight as to what to do as an employee of an organization that takes a "make do with what you're given" attitude toward resources needed to be effective at one's work - but it does, perhaps, hold a lesson in leadership and resource management to be less dismissive of the expressed needs of employees.