3 ms·
You should be rewarded since your productivity on assigned tasks will theoretically be significantly higher than your coworkers who are prioritizing e-mail and
by aeternus 8y ago
You should be rewarded since your productivity on assigned tasks will theoretically be significantly higher than your coworkers who are prioritizing e-mail and being constantly interrupted.
If those coworkers are able to achieve the same level of productivity while also prioritizing and addressing active issues, then they are arguably more valuable and don't they deserve the larger bonus?
- mbillie1 8y ago> You should be rewarded since your productivity on assigned tasks will theoretically be significantly higher than your coworkers who are prioritizing e-mail and being constantly interrupted. Sure, but lots of things _should_ be that are not. The reality is that the appearance of productivity (for example, habitually timely replies to emails) will impact your promotion/compensation more than your actual worth in many, many organizations.
- nlawalker 8y agoNah, it's that your definition of productivity differs from your organization's. This frequently happens with a lot of other concepts too, like "quality", "maintainability" and "security." Part of being employed is simply compromising with the organization on these things.
- mbillie1 8y ago> Part of being employed is simply compromising with the organization on these things. Since my definition is different from my employers, you say I should adopt their definition, and call this "compromise"? That's an interesting way to use that word.