If there's any reason why some people are angry with the rich--it's because of rich people who look down on the poor. Some people are born rich without knowing the struggles of the one who originally acquired the wealth. Some rich parents make the fatal mistake of making their children feel entitled. Meanwhile, some rich parents make their children do the right thing by not waiting until things get too far. Some rich parents end up making their children attend middle-class schools, do summer jobs, work as employees in their own businesses, and teach them the value of wealth, especially by narrating the struggles before they got wealthy. In looking for a business partner, I feel it's very important to look at the attitude of these people. How do they treat people who do menial work?
I could imagine looking forward to a business contract. However, it turns out that the potential business partner is a spoiled brat. Maybe, it's already a red alarm if I'm invited to an overly expensive restaurant. I guess it's because I tend to prefer eating at more affordable places. I might imagine myself dressed formally in non-branded clothes. Maybe, I'd wear a suit, and a tie, and these clothes were probably bought from the UK, that is ukay-ukay (surplus shop) and not the United Kingdom. The business meeting begins and I could notice this spoiled businessman gets in. I might notice that while he treats me over to dinner (and chances are, the food isn't worth the price but the person wants to flaunt out his wealth, that is assuming he's not really burdened in so much debt) - he starts to show his snobbish elitist attitude. The waiter arrives and he treats the waiter like garbage. He says, "They're just low-level employees!" This person starts to yell at the waiter as if the waiter isn't a human being. That should be a red flag as to why that person isn't right for a business partner.
The incident would remind me of the skit. Can you imagine that after the dinner, this snobbish businessman would tell his child, "Son, if you don't study well, you'll end up like that waiter! A useless slave! You want to be elite so study hard!" I wrote about having a toxic view of menial work back in my elementary to high school days. I was told that if I didn't study well--I could end up as a janitor or a garbage collector. It's said that such work is only meant for the lowest of the law. However, during times of disaster, who did a lot of the repair except those who did menial work? Who does the physical work in a construction firm? The workers may not own the means of production but they're necessary in order to get the means of production to work. The workers need to be paid according to their service or their service is meaningless. Yet, for some people, such people are just "replaceable" which is really devaluing the value of labor.
Whether we want to admit it or not, low-level employees are the building blocks of the company. Some big-time billionaires today started with low-level work. Billionaires don't become billionaires overnight as some SJWs want to believe in. In contrast, those who went from rags to riches didn't seize the means of production but acquired it and then entrusted it to others. In fact, low-level employees are important because, without them, there would be no operations. Here's an insight from the Small Business Chronicles which what it means to be a "low-level" employee or better called, entry-level employee:
While upper-level employees make and implement decisions, low-level employees are usually the ones who carry them out. Low-level employees are the ones who assemble merchandise, serve food and provide customer service. Although low-level employees are paid the least, they are integral to the success of an organization. In fact, some corporations require that their upper-level employees work among the ranks of low-level workers so they understand better how the organization operates.
There's the principle that happy employees lead to happy customers. The employees may not own the means of production but they do own the value of their labor. Sure, those who start get the lowest pay but it shouldn't be too low either. Here's a useful excerpt according to TaskUs:
The happier an employee is towards their work, the more engaged, motivated, and better their performance is. This delivery of high-quality service combined with a positive attitude results in customer happiness and loyalty. Moreover, happy employees show increased productivity and fewer absences at work. Happier employees lead to a positive work culture that encourages healthy relationships among coworkers, improves an employee’s mental and physical well-being, and ultimately boosts a business’ profitability.
The idea that capitalism is all about squeezing profits isn't real. That's when capitalism becomes commercialism (read here). The value of the work is basically that treat your employees right and there will be much fewer reasons to rebel. A fear-based environment (that is, where fear alone is used to keep people in check) will only create opposite results. Sure, sending a threat can produce results but it's rather short-lived. People having a skinflint boss are bound to resign sooner or later. Employees who are given proper working conditions, proper pay, and other benefits are bound to perform better. There will be fewer employee terminations if there are fewer reasons to do unethical stuff. If a work environment is hostile--employee termination can skyrocket because employees will be prone to doing stuff like stealing and leaking company secrets in retaliation.
 |
| Research Gate |
A business partner who doesn't treat low-level workers doesn't understand the work chain either. If employees are sick, tired, and demotivated then can we expect better work results? Just think about how Mao Zedong's dictatorial Great Leap Forward was a failure. Mao could issue all the deadly threats he could but China never came to a Great Leap Forward as he expected. Mao ruthlessly had people who didn't meet their quotas beaten up but did it work? China has become a hostile work environment during Mao's regime. The same can apply to Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany, North Korea's Kim Dynasty, Venezuela under Nicolas Maduro, Cuba under Fidel Castro, or just any extremely totalitarian regime. Fear-based leadership ends up producing a population that can't do well. Some people tend to think that making people fear the consequences alone will help. Unfortunately, history has proven otherwise with how dictatorships eventually fall
That means doing business with such a person is like signing up an alliance with a dictatorship. Currently, one can see the plight of Chinese citizens in today's overly censored China. I don't blame Jack Ma for actually leaving China every now and then. I don't blame Chinese rich people for moving out of their country either. Why do you think China did better under Deng Xiaoping and other party leaders than the current Xi Jinping? Brutal policies like the so-called zero COVID-19 policy and unnecessary crackdowns can scare even local investors. Can you really trust a business partner who's ungrateful to one's low-level employees to contribute to the company's success? Can you trust a business partner who treats employees like he or she runs a Communist or Nazi concentration camp?
It can be very infectious, especially to good company value. There's a statement that says, "Bad company corrupts good character." That's why we're told to choose who we go out with. I know some women who frequently went out with loose women. In turn, she became even more loose with her morals. The same can go for why I refuse to partner with someone who's a narcissist. It would really mean that one can sooner or later suffer the consequences of such actions. It can also result in severe chastising when one chooses to work with such people.
Character evaluation is very important. Does that business partner treat workers like disposables or does that person value them? It's very important to understand because such people will just ruin business profits in the long run. It can be profitable to make billions in the short run. However, that will potentially kill trillions in the long run.
Comments
Post a Comment