Hi there đ
As I started to cross-post on LinkedIn, I wondered: do I really want to do this copy-posting? Do I want Linkedin and email to be the same?
Iâm inclined to think that the inbox is more sacred than the feed of a social network. The fact that you gave me your email and that I can message you directly without intermediaries and algorithms is of value. While the social network is social, your inbox is private, intimate.
Ok, I decided: the email is intimate and more valuable, so I should do it differently.
So, I want to experiment with this email newsletter while still copy-posting on Linkedin about the day's topic. Let me know how this works.
First, Iâll recover this personal intro that was absent in the last two posts. Then, Iâll occasionally go a bit more personal, emotional even, if I may dare.
Iâll share recommendations on newsletters and podcasts.
And more goodies.
TodayâŠ
You can spot some of my obsessions as you go through the archives. One of them is âWorkâ. It is such a central part of our lives and an endless source of thinking and wondering.
Work in Work out
Why do companies assume some kind of monogamy regarding the relationship between the employee and the company? Why does a company have several employees, but an employee can't have several companies?
This unbalance is a form of power - the company doesn't depend on the employee (it has many), but the employee is entirely dependent on the company.
Of course, that relation of power led to workersâ unions and the idea of class conflict. But thatâs not what I am interested in here.
Iâm thinking primarily of white-collar knowledge workers.
Even if some people admit to having some side gigs, like sporadic teaching, consulting or advising, they usually donât say it out loud. Unless it is so sporadic, it only adds to their pride and curriculum. In that case, theyâll shout it out loud.
Many individuals choose to keep their side gigs discreet. But why is that? Is it because they feel they are betraying their employer by not devoting all their time awake to their job? Or is it because they fear being judged if others find out they are not giving âeverything they gotâ?
It is true that many contracts require exclusivity. We sell our time in bulk, at a discount. But thatâs more an enforcement of the norm, of the expectation.
All this brings to light the confusion between work and job.
Work is a human activity. Itâs personal, like sleep or socializing. It is an activity that can fulfill us in many ways.
We will work for many decades, but a job is a limited arrangement. A job is when an employer rents our âwork timeâ with the expectation of some service. They donât own us or our time.
A job or company is not a religion we devote to, sacrifice to or have faith in. We may like the company's purpose, but it will not give us salvation. If a company is not for life, then it cannot be a religion you abandon after five years to join another.
A company is not a family that cares for us and satisfies our social and emotional needs. Where is the family when you leave or youâre laid off? Like it or not, a family is for life.
We may find friends at work, but our colleagues are not friends by default. The fact that we make friends at a particular company and then, after leaving, lose contact is a testament that those are context-based friendships. They wonât survive when we remove the context.
Back to polyamory. We would all benefit from having more open relationships with jobs â having several jobs concurrently.
Imagine the cross-pollination of experience, ideas and techniques
change of context brings a change in perspective that could help us solve human and business challenges.
Extend networks and business connections.
Contribute to other projects
Benefit from a slice of hard-to-get expertise.
We could even imagine an increase in efficiency. Because, for example, the marginal impact of 2 hours is negligible in a 40 hours workweek. But those 2 hours in another company/project could make a lot of difference.
In fact, some companies or projects donât need a full-time employee, they need an expert for 1 week, for 2h/week.
Yes, today, thatâs solved by hiring consultants, at a premium. In the future, we will all be freelancers with several gigs at the same time. For everyoneâs benefit.
Studies predict that by 2027 the majority of US high-skilled workers will be freelance contractors. This trend will grow as people seek more independence, freedom and self-reliance. Technology and services supporting them are also improving yearly, and the COVID-19 pandemic only accelerated this trend. Automation of human tasks and more efficient e-marketplaces will release human potential to be more independent, mobile and fulfilled.
If in the 20th century, the rallying cry was "Workers of the world unite!"
In the 21st century, we may hear a new call to action: "Works of the world, set yourself free."
I could go on endlessly about this. Not all people would be prepared for such a challenge. In fact very few... take for instance the increased stress each person would have to manage their own time as if they were running a consulting company trying to maximize the allocation of one's time. Secondly, how complex and time consuming this overhead would be (say a typical 20% of management time) - who would pay for that? Thirdly, how to prioritise between two or more jobs when they peak at the same time. Fourthly, ... (just to prove my point that I could go endlessly... ;) All that said, consultants (or contractors, if you prefer) already work this way, offering their time in chunks to their employers. They they have to manage all that above, or have their main employer doing so. I guess...