3 ms·

I think the idea is to treat employees you pay as if they where doing it for free. Say you give a boring task that’s not meaningful to a volunteer they’ll just

• kareemsabri 4y ago
  I read it this way as well. That said, sometimes boring work needs to be done too. Who does it in this framework?
  • SkyPuncher 4y ago
    It's about ensuring there's a mix and an opportunity to work on different types of work. It's okay to have boring work. It's challenging to _only_ have boring work.
• ALittleLight 4y ago
  That seems like a confused idea of both volunteers and employees. To whom should boring tasks be given? If I volunteer at a place it's because I believe in the mission and if I work at a place it's because I want to get paid. Either way, if boring work is what's needed, that's what I'll do.
• lmeyerov 4y ago
  It's similar to hiring on mission: ensure alignment between what the person wants to do and what the company needs done. The more out of alignment, the more costly in energy, $, time, management, QA, etc. it becomes, and the less likely bottom-up innovation happens. In this case, a volunteer is a nice mission-less proxy. Is some work engaging for the owning employee, or do you need to get someone else on it, or even switch to outside staff for it?