Chapter Content
Okay, so, like, let's talk about what really drives us, you know? Not just, like, making money, but what *really* gets us going, especially in the world of, like, business and economics.
So, think about it. We're all, like, social animals, right? We compete for stuff, yeah, for, like, recognition, resources, whatever. But what really sets humans apart is how well we can, like, communicate and cooperate. Like, *massive* scale cooperation. It's what gives us, like, unmatched abilities, you know?
We *need* to belong. We want that, like, validation, that feeling of being part of something bigger. And we all kind of, deep down, understand that we can do, like, *way* more together than we ever could alone. It's a balance, though, right? Competition pushes us to work harder, to be more innovative, to be more creative. But cooperation? That's what makes that work actually productive, makes those innovations actually, like, *happen*. And that goes for countries, too. National success, economic success, it all depends on how well a society can handle that push and pull between competing and cooperating. And, surprise, surprise, it's the same for, like, any business!
You know, think about, like, a simple example, like, building a toaster. One guy, on his own, tried to do it from scratch. Nine months, cost a fortune, and the toaster was, like, terrible. No single person could build an iPhone or, like, a nuclear power plant, right? Like, no one even knows *how* to do it alone. A whole bunch of people have to contribute for something complex like that to be created.
That's why we have teams, right? Why we have organizations. People join sports clubs, just to, like, enjoy doing something together. People donate to museums so that everyone can enjoy the art. Professionals work in hospitals and schools because they know they can, like, help people *better* when they're sharing knowledge. Humans can’t fly solo, but a group of humans can build an airliner, and another group can fly it around the world.
So, the measure of success for any group, whether it’s a company, or a sports team, or, like, a school, or a museum, is that the final *result* is better than what everyone could have done on their own. You know?
All this collective action adds value all around us. Think of running a marathon, even that's a collective event. Everyone running together, cheering each other on.
So, where does the motivation *really* come from, though? It's rarely just about the money. Most marathon runners aren't doing it to get rich, right? They're raising money for charity. People feel a connection with others who support their team in a sporting event. And even at work, where the bottom line is money, the social part is still important.
Think about Maslow's hierarchy of needs, right? You gotta have the basics, food and shelter. Then safety. But *then* you want to belong and feel appreciated. And *then* you can really go after that self-actualization thing. You know, even people struggling to make ends meet still want that sense of belonging and affirmation.
So, employees go to work expecting a paycheck, sure. But they also want, like, good coworkers and recognition, a feeling that they're making something good and useful. The bonus is nice, yeah, but it's also, like, a symbol of recognition. People want to feel acknowledged and valued.
There's, like, this psychologist, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, and he says people actually report being happier at work than at home sometimes. He talks about "flow," that feeling of being completely absorbed in something you're good at, like, just completely focused on achieving a difficult task.
“Flow” is what drives people to climb mountains or launch new products or play beautiful music. Think about a soccer player, like, just totally in the zone.
But even those people aren’t doing it just to be nice. A famous actor is flattered by being on stage and well paid for being in movies. A successful athlete is one of the best paid in the world. In almost all these cases, there are, like, elements of vanity and self-interest involved.
Or, think of what Steve Jobs said: "The only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do." And, as with some other high achievers, that can be associated with being very self-absorbed.
One conductor said he didn’t want to conduct American orchestras because “they finish the rehearsal not because the music is finished, but because the time is finished.” Which kind of shows the difference between a group really working together and people just doing their jobs.
These things sound obvious, but a lot of writing about business sort of misses this point. Some think it's all just a class war, rich against poor. Some treat companies like machines, just putting stuff in and getting stuff out. And those approaches are based on what business was like way back when.
Things have changed a lot. Even though class and status still matter in business, they're way different than they were back in the day. In the US, in Britain, even in Europe, status is now mostly based on what you've *done*, on personal achievement or celebrity, not just who your parents were.
It used to be that personal wealth was directly connected to the capital used to produce things. That connection has, like, broken down over time. It used to be that to produce something, you need some capital to do so. It's not always like that these days. The models and language we used to use to talk about business, based on old factories and banking systems, it just doesn't really work for the world of, like, Apple and Google.
Now, economists and legal scholars focus more on individuals, not on class. There’s a focus on individual autonomy. And sometimes it’s the government’s responsibility to regulate and enforce collective action. In doing so, however, both schools minimize the role of communities, which are critical to our economic and social lives. They also marginalize the competition and cooperation between those communities which is the basis of our prosperity.
Some academics treat companies like they are a "nexus of contracts," just a bunch of people who find it convenient to work together for a while. People who believe that sometimes treat the social instincts as something not essential. Everything is based on incentives. Rationality is just about, like, getting stuff. These assumptions then become self-fulfilling. When you design your business in that way, the whole organization becomes mechanical.
A really important point is that by emphasizing the transactional parts of business relationships *too* much, we undermine not only the relationship between business and society, but we undermine the effectiveness of business itself, even in transactional terms.