'Attractive'

“I’m not going to take on a project in Maastricht—I want to be home by 6:00 p.m.,” a quote from the day-to-day reality of a professional service provider. These days, internal staffing requires just as much lobbying as external sales.

Imagine being an employer in these times of labor shortages. Good employees have high expectations—and rightly so. Less qualified employees do too, for that matter. That’s less justified. Wage increases are the logical consequence, but these demands aren’t solely economic in nature.

Don’t get me wrong—I don’t feel sorry for employers. But there’s something unbalanced about employment relationships these days. The attraction should be mutual. For a lasting relationship, it’s not enough for the love to come from just one side. The employer must engage and inspire, but is also entitled to make demands. Let me explain how I see it.

The root cause of this runs deeper than just labor market shortages. The freedom individuals have gained is a social phenomenon. Why is that? As far as I’m concerned, we’re doing well. Maybe even too well. We are materially rich but emotionally poor. When “woke” activists and “wappies” control public opinion, social media is taken way too seriously, and single-issue parties dominate politics, it’s clear that trivial matters are running rampant. The Titanic has nothing on this.

If we look a little deeper, we see that all our threats (climate, security, etc.) are actually quite far removed from our daily lives. ^{On average*1}, we lack “nothing,” and yet we’re not satisfied. We’re free, able to do whatever we want, but we’re outraged at the slightest thing. We’re primarily focused on ourselves. In fact, we’re searching for ourselves—especially on social media. Lost in freedom. No boundaries. Everything should be allowed. Empty—you could even say that’s the result.

An employee’s freedom is a great asset. Being able to become who you are is the ultimate goal. Yet that also requires making choices. After all, we are defined by our limits. And those limits aren’t optional. Commitment—stick to your choices. Buuuut, responsibility isn’t second nature (anymore) for everyone.

What should an employer do now? Appeal to that freedom (“anything goes here”) or to responsibility (“if we both show commitment, you can grow tremendously”)? Which is more appealing in the long run? Think of the issue as an Australian pasture. There are no fences, no boundaries; the cattle are free and stay close to the water source. The most attractive breeding ground for sustainable growth.

Imagine being an employee in this age of freedom. You have endless options, and you’re offered plenty of time and money. How do you decide what’s the right choice? Which employer challenges you to take responsibility and demands that you use all your freedom to do something meaningful—for yourself, the company, and society? The same applies to an employment relationship: love without commitment isn’t sustainable.

Here’s a recent example. At a national daily newspaper, a new employee—a recent high school graduate—approached the editor-in-chief and said, “I think it would be a good idea for me to start my own column.” Well, well.

*1) Of course, I am not downplaying the plight of minorities or the underprivileged. Poverty and other forms of disadvantage are, as always, a concern. On average, we have never been richer, based on indicators such as GDP per capita, the state of healthcare, access to Education, etc.