hm, i like a lot of the author's suggestions, but they're missing one big piece of context. underachieving is a symptom of work input not correlating to pay ou

hm, i like a lot of the author's suggestions, but they're missing one big piece of context. underachieving is a symptom of work input not correlating to pay output. why work more if you don't get rewarded for it? for the joy of work? sure, but then you are getting taken advantage of because you are putting more effort in than the company is paying you out. if you notice jobs that rely on the "joy of work" to get people to do them like science and video game development, you will find that wages are fucking awful for the effort that is put in. and let me share a secret: that is 100% of the time going to be the case no matter what you do. they don't hire you for your own benefit, they hire you for their benefit. you get the scraps, even if those scraps seem like a lot of money to you. do not be naive about this because ignorance is to your immense detriment. but let's say someone wants to be promoted. you might have to work hard to get promoted (assuming your social skills aren't enough -- they're far, far more important than actual productivity/quality) but you still probably don't have to be busy 100% of the time. you just need to produce X% more quality or volume than the next best person. greater values of X might get you noticed and promoted sooner -- maybe. that isn't even fully up to you, at the end of the day. hence why "underachieving" is the norm. hard work is not correlated to getting paid.