后covid工作场所的效率、有效性和健康

Peter Kalina
{"title":"后covid工作场所的效率、有效性和健康","authors":"Peter Kalina","doi":"10.30560/hssr.v5n1p1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1840, organized labor compelled factory owners to limit their workdays to eight hours. Subsequent to this action, management discovered that output actually increased, while mistakes and accidents decreased.   In 1916, the Adamson Act established an eight-hour day for railroad workers. This was the first federal law that regulated the hours of workers in private companies.  The eight-hour day became a standard for most workers in 1937, when the Fair Labor Standards Act was first proposed under the New Deal (Samuel, 2000).     \nBefore COVID changed perceptions about how people could accomplish their tasks, leaders expected employees to put in long days at the office, and then respond to emails at all hours. They were expected to willingly donate nights, weekends, and vacation time; all without complaining (Carmichael, 2015). The organizational charts of many companies have work cascading from the top of the organizational pyramid down to the bottom. In that version, we work long hours because authority figures (our bosses) tell us to.  Managers want their employees to be “Humble, Hungry, and Smart” (Lecioni, 2016). The problem with “hungry” is that a work ethic equating with excess work hours (or the perception of busyness) is an old-school management philosophy that is not sustainable. It leads to overwork, diminished effectiveness, and burnout. That’s not to say we can’t work very hard or for very long hours.  We can. We just can’t do it routinely. A week of 60 hours to resolve a crisis is very different from chronic overwork.  Predictable, required time off makes teams more productive (Perlow, 2009).   ","PeriodicalId":363697,"journal":{"name":"Humanities and Social Science Research","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficiency, Effectiveness and Wellness in the post-COVID Workplace\",\"authors\":\"Peter Kalina\",\"doi\":\"10.30560/hssr.v5n1p1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 1840, organized labor compelled factory owners to limit their workdays to eight hours. Subsequent to this action, management discovered that output actually increased, while mistakes and accidents decreased.   In 1916, the Adamson Act established an eight-hour day for railroad workers. This was the first federal law that regulated the hours of workers in private companies.  The eight-hour day became a standard for most workers in 1937, when the Fair Labor Standards Act was first proposed under the New Deal (Samuel, 2000).     \\nBefore COVID changed perceptions about how people could accomplish their tasks, leaders expected employees to put in long days at the office, and then respond to emails at all hours. They were expected to willingly donate nights, weekends, and vacation time; all without complaining (Carmichael, 2015). The organizational charts of many companies have work cascading from the top of the organizational pyramid down to the bottom. In that version, we work long hours because authority figures (our bosses) tell us to.  Managers want their employees to be “Humble, Hungry, and Smart” (Lecioni, 2016). The problem with “hungry” is that a work ethic equating with excess work hours (or the perception of busyness) is an old-school management philosophy that is not sustainable. It leads to overwork, diminished effectiveness, and burnout. That’s not to say we can’t work very hard or for very long hours.  We can. We just can’t do it routinely. A week of 60 hours to resolve a crisis is very different from chronic overwork.  Predictable, required time off makes teams more productive (Perlow, 2009).   \",\"PeriodicalId\":363697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Humanities and Social Science Research\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Humanities and Social Science Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30560/hssr.v5n1p1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humanities and Social Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30560/hssr.v5n1p1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1840年,劳工组织迫使工厂主将工作日限制在8小时。在这一行动之后,管理层发现产量实际上增加了,而错误和事故却减少了。1916年,《亚当森法案》规定铁路工人每天工作八小时。这是第一部规定私营公司工人工作时间的联邦法律。1937年,当公平劳动标准法案在新政下首次提出时,八小时工作制成为大多数工人的标准(Samuel, 2000)。在COVID改变人们对如何完成任务的看法之前,领导者希望员工在办公室工作很长时间,然后随时回复电子邮件。他们被要求自愿奉献晚上、周末和假期的时间;都没有抱怨(Carmichael, 2015)。在许多公司的组织结构图中,工作从金字塔的顶端层叠到底部。在那个版本中,我们长时间工作是因为权威人物(我们的老板)告诉我们这样做。管理者希望他们的员工“谦逊、渴望和聪明”(Lecioni, 2016)。“饥饿”的问题在于,将工作伦理等同于超时工作(或认为自己很忙)是一种老派的管理哲学,是不可持续的。这会导致过度工作、效率下降和倦怠。这并不是说我们不能努力工作或长时间工作。我们可以。我们只是不能经常这样做。一周工作60个小时来解决危机与长期过度工作是非常不同的。可预测的、必要的休假时间使团队更有效率(Perlow, 2009)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficiency, Effectiveness and Wellness in the post-COVID Workplace
In 1840, organized labor compelled factory owners to limit their workdays to eight hours. Subsequent to this action, management discovered that output actually increased, while mistakes and accidents decreased.   In 1916, the Adamson Act established an eight-hour day for railroad workers. This was the first federal law that regulated the hours of workers in private companies.  The eight-hour day became a standard for most workers in 1937, when the Fair Labor Standards Act was first proposed under the New Deal (Samuel, 2000).     Before COVID changed perceptions about how people could accomplish their tasks, leaders expected employees to put in long days at the office, and then respond to emails at all hours. They were expected to willingly donate nights, weekends, and vacation time; all without complaining (Carmichael, 2015). The organizational charts of many companies have work cascading from the top of the organizational pyramid down to the bottom. In that version, we work long hours because authority figures (our bosses) tell us to.  Managers want their employees to be “Humble, Hungry, and Smart” (Lecioni, 2016). The problem with “hungry” is that a work ethic equating with excess work hours (or the perception of busyness) is an old-school management philosophy that is not sustainable. It leads to overwork, diminished effectiveness, and burnout. That’s not to say we can’t work very hard or for very long hours.  We can. We just can’t do it routinely. A week of 60 hours to resolve a crisis is very different from chronic overwork.  Predictable, required time off makes teams more productive (Perlow, 2009).   
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信