Job Satisfaction -- "Good to Average"
I've lost track of the times I've seen forms for persons indicating their belief that their work performance was "excellent," while their job satisfaction was only "good" or "average." If we are to believe what this says it would indicate there are a disproportionate number of folks who do exceptional work, but who are also undervalued for what they do. Apparently this phenomena is not uncommon.
According to David McRaney, author of You are Not so Smart, we all have a very human tendency to give ourselves credit for being much better people than we actually are. Studies from the 1990s show that we "tend to accept credit when [we] succeed, but blame bad luck, unfair rules, difficult instructors, bad bosses, cheaters, and so on when [we] fail" (p. 158). Basically, it seems that all or most of us have an inordinate fear of being ordinary, so much so that it's very difficult for us to recognize our mistakes and acknowledge our limitations.
McRaney adds, "The last thirty years' worth of research shows just about all of us think we are more competent than our coworkers, more ethical than our friends, friendlier than the general public, and more intelligent than our peers, more attractive than the average person, less prejudiced than people in our region, younger-looking than people the same age, better drivers than most people we know, better children than our siblings, and that we will live longer than the average lifespan" (p. 159).
Even more difficult is the constant evaluation done in some settings, e.g., healthcare and retail, leading folks from physicians to pharmacy techs to prompt you to give the "right" response.
"If there's any reason my service or your experience was not a '10' today, please tell me now."
The problem is that compensation is often based on those ratings, creating environments where it is even more likely for performance to be inflated--both by those serving and those being served. Perhaps you felt the assistance you received was an "8" -- a good rating, but you give it a "10" because you like your physician or you feel sorry for the retail person assisting you. Seriously, is it even possible for someone to earn a "10" every time?
So if this is the way we view ourselves and others insist we be viewed, what chance do we have at being an ordinary, hardworking, ethical, decent human being? Perhaps it's time we hold ourselves to a different standard, as opposed to figuring that no matter what we do we're better than most of our coworkers. Given the nature of what social psychologists call the "self-serving bias," is this even possible?
There are a couple of things that help actually. One is to tell yourself how hard it will be for you to stay on task, be persistent, practice ethical behavior at all times and demonstrate kindness with your coworkers. Those people who recognized (or were told) a task would be difficult, tended to change how they saw themselves in comparison to an "imagined average." When you believe a task to be easy, the illusion of superiority takes over. When you distinguish it as difficult, you are more likely to make a realistic assessment of yourself.
Secondly, watch to whom you compare yourself. Identify the highest standard or the best person you know doing similar work to yours. Now estimate your value compared to that standard or person. If you do this, you're much more likely to have a realistic estimation of your worth or significance.
It's true that some people struggle with self-esteem issues impacting their ability to perform. Far more wrestle with a self-serving bias hindering their ability to honestly assess their contribution. On some level we need to believe we are likable and capable, but far more often we benefit from a more realistic self assessment. If you want to learn more about the ways you may be fooling yourself, I suggest McRaney's book. It might make you uncomfortable, but you may also learn something you don't already know.
Ordinarily yours,
Dr. Jennifer Baker
No comments:
Post a Comment