Asset or Commodity?

Most all of us start out our careers as commodities for our employers. Regardless of our profession, we’re pretty raw talent needing refinement. Early on we are given discrete assignments, with specific deadlines, defined by someone else. We’re rarely provided with a sense of how our tasks fit into the bigger picture of the overall project.

We’re assigned to write code for a particular piece of software without any sense of the final product; or research a particular issue and draft a memo, which will be part of a larger report to a client; or design a particular part that will fit into the larger product or system; or frame a house that has been designed by someone else.

In each of these tasks, we are given parameters that are decided by someone else: the boss –team lead, foreman, architect, division director, partner – to whom we’re assigned. They decide who does what, how much time should be allotted to the task, and they determine the quality of the finished product. However, the boss may also be a commodity.

In his book, A Whole New Mind (Amazon.com link), Daniel Pink notes the “three As” of Abundance, Automation and Asia that are influencing the shift from the information age to the conceptual age. In the information age, work was organized around knowledge workers – accountants, attorneys, doctors, engineers and executives – who acquire, organize and interpret data; and provide functional, logical and rational products and services. These workers, as educated and highly trained as they are, are commodities. Their skills are in abundance; their work can be easily automated and outsourced for cheaper, faster products. (A recent New York Times article reported on how new “e-discovery” software can analyze legal documents in a fraction of the time and costs that an army of lawyers used to.)

Commodities are easily replaced. Younger, cheaper, more nimble employees are always coming up through the ranks and ready to take their turn. If you have spent your career assembling a body of knowledge, an expertise, that is in overabundance or just no longer in demand, that computers can do faster and overseas labor can do cheaper, then you’re a commodity and in danger of being replaced.

Assets on the other hand, continually add value to an organization. Assets are creative, designing new products and services that improve the bottom line. Assets interact and empathize with clients to help define their needs and design solutions that fit.

So, what do you think? Can you distinguish yourself as either an asset or a commodity in your career? Are you comfortable with this distinction?

If you’re a commodity, are you comfortable with project-based tasks defined and assigned by others? Can you shift to more of an asset-based career path?

If you’re an asset, do you design products and service that continue to have meaning to customers and for clients?

Labor Day 2010

Robert Reich recently wrote an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times entitled “How to End the Great Recession.” Reich’s pessimistic take on the failure of current efforts to stimulate the economy is because the structure of the economy has changed rather than due to the normal business cycle.

Reich notes that productivity enhancing software and outsourcing jobs to countries with cheaper labor forces have been among the contributors to many jobs vanishing from the economy and thus, the continuing high rate of unemployment. Reich argues that it will take a restructuring of public policies to encourage job growth and position America to be competitive in the future.

The permanent disappearance of jobs is one of the most difficult issues for those of us who counsel and coach people looking for their next position. Those clients in real estate related fields, financial services and other occupations have seen their jobs just evaporate.

Dan Pink, in his book, A Whole New Mind, wrote about the “3As” of Abundance, Asia and Automation. His thesis was that traditionally routine work that can be automated will be outsourced to Asian countries where smart people can do the work cheaper than their American counterparts.

The point is there are jobs that are not coming back and the people affected most are the middle class, which has long been the mainstay of this country’s economic well being.

So what can you do? Whether you’re employed or not, there are things you need to do to ensure that you retain your value (and your job):

• Take responsibility – for both your own career and for being informed on how the changed economy affects your future. I’ve written plenty on the New Normal and strategies to navigate it relative to your career.

• Be accountable – for your own career development. Don’t rely on the organization for which you work to provide a career path. Know your value; tell your story of how you influence outcomes that contribute to the organization’s bottom line.

• Pay attention – regardless of your political leanings, don’t swallow the simple bromides that either incumbents or their opposition offer about what’s wrong with our nation. Make them go deeper with their explanations and proposals for improvement. Think about what they’re saying. Does it make sense, why or why not? Don’t succumb to the polarizing arguments that both sides present. Question them, get engaged, hold them accountable.

So what do you think needs to happen to remain productive and employed in today’s economy? Can you as an individual have an impact, if not on macro economic policy, on your economic policy – on your career?

Book Review: "Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us," by Daniel Pink

In Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, Dan Pink has written a book about motivation and the problem that most businesses haven’t caught up to what really motivates us.

“Too many organizations – not just companies, but governments and nonprofits as well – still operate from assumptions about human potential and individual performance that are outdated, unexamined, and rooted more in folklore than in science.”

The pursuit of short-term incentive plans and pay for performance requires an upgrade to Motivation 3.0, which incorporates three essential elements: Autonomy – the desire to direct our own lives; Mastery – the urge to improve on something that matters; and Purpose – the desire to do something in the service of something larger than ourselves.

Pink’s Motivation 3.0 is the logical evolution from two previous societal “operating systems” – the laws, social customs and economic provisos that “sit atop a layer of instructions, protocols, and suppositions about how the world works.” Motivation 1.0 was a basic survival operating system of early humans – the hunter-gatherers – whose day-to-day survival governed their behavior.

As civilization progressed and became more complicated, economic rules spawned a new operating system of external rewards and punishments – Motivation 2.0, which was extremely effective for rule-based, routine tasks of the type that prevailed from the Industrial Revolution up through the mid 20^th century.

The carrot and stick approach of Motivation 2.0, however, has become unreliable for how we organize what we do; how we think about what we do; and how we do what we do. In fact, in our current operating system, Motivation 2.0 tends to “extinguish intrinsic motivation, diminish performance, crush creativity and crowd out good behavior.” It can encourage unethical behavior, create addictions to rewards that distort decision-making, and foster short-term thinking.

Thus, an upgrade is required – Motivation 3.0 – for the smooth functioning of 21^st century business, which depends on and fosters the inherent satisfaction of the activity itself; what Pink call “Type I” behavior. Type I behavior leads to “stronger performance, greater health and higher overall well-being.”

Pink shows how companies that are embracing the upgrade Motivation 3.0 and its basic elements are outperforming those that continue to employ the old Motivation 2.0 carrot and stick techniques.

The “default setting” of Motivation 3.0 is autonomy and self-direction. People need autonomy over task (what they do), time (when they do it), team (who they do it with) and technique (how they do it). Management’s role, then, isn’t about walking around and seeing if people are in their offices at certain times; it’s about creating conditions for them to do their best work.

While Motivation 2.0 required compliance, Motivation 3.0 demands engagement. Only engagement can produce mastery – becoming better at something that matters. Mastery abides by three basic rules. Mastery is a mindset – it requires the capacity to see your abilities as infinitely improvable. Mastery is a pain – it demands effort, grit and deliberate practice. And mastery is asymptote – it’s impossible to realize fully.

Autonomous people, working toward mastery perform at very high levels. But those who do so in the service of a greater objective – greater than themselves – achieve even more. Thus, in Motivation 3.0, purpose maximization, along with profit maximization, is an aspiration and guiding principle. Pink contends that the “move to accompany profit maximization with purpose maximization has the potential to rejuvenate our businesses and remake our world” (my emphasis).

So, if you’re running an organization, are you running on an outdated operating system or have you upgraded to Motivation 3.0, which will provide greater performance. As an individual, can you embrace the elements of Motivation 3.0 to enhance your performance within the organization?

Perhaps a greater question is, can organizations and individuals upgrade to Motivation 3.0 or are we doomed to run inefficiently on an old, obsolete operating system?