4 ms·
So put plainly, hire people who come from low income families because they appreciate rewards more, and stay hungry for longer.
by qprofyeh 3y ago
So put plainly, hire people who come from low income families because they appreciate rewards more, and stay hungry for longer.
- tenebrisalietum 3y agoAre you saying it'd be good to take it further... e.g. increase taxes so we have more hungry, appreciative people. Would we have better companies and economy if this was applied to corporate officers?
- qprofyeh 3y agoWhat? No I did not. I am saying give the same opportunities to people from lesser social backgrounds. They will not disappoint.
- roughly 3y agoArticle states the opposite - people from low income families react to rewards less than those from higher income families.
- Avicebron 3y agoSo theoretically then they would be more level headed employees, and might not have as strong inclination to harm others with their seeking of SES. e.g. the reward stimulus of money is lessened so the negative externality of harm is a stronger counterbalance?
- qprofyeh 3y agoWe read the same article. I interpret less reaction to rewards as being more appreciative. It’s deep, but hear me out. Less reaction means they (and myself included once) have the same expectation as the ones giving the reward, it being an equilibrium. Because the rewards match the expectation over a longer period of time, that’s why they (again, from personal experience) stay hungry for a longer period of time. It will take much longer for a smart poor person to really think they’ve made it to the other side permanently.
- Erratic6576 3y agoNo. 1. Don’t play with people. 2. Be honest and fair. 3. Hire people who follow those points. I’m a fan of Alfie Kohn’s Punished by Rewards