The "Right" of Personal Competency
I was helping my daughter with an assignment this week and came across a concept that I hadn't focused on in a very long time if ever- the "right" of personal competency.
It would seem that back in the day the Founding Fathers wanted to ensure two very important rights that they felt were absent in the feudal societies and relationships that we left behind in Europe. Everybody is very familiar with personal property rights. Our right to own property, build a business, and generally prosper. You don't hear nearly as much about the right of personal competency; the right to express yourself, market your skills, and literally to "reinvent" yourself.
In Europe, and in fact in a lot of the world, your "destiny" was somewhat predetermined. Literally during the feudal period the "serfs" were tied to the land. You could not leave or relocate without your "Lord's" permission.
There were a lot of riots and other ugly history associated with collective bargaining as well, the right of individuals to bargain for the value of their services was not provided in that society.
In the early days we had what seemed to be an inexhaustible supply of land so anyone could "reinvent" themselves. Everybody was at least theoretically equal.
The Industrial Revolution changed a lot of things. We moved from an agrarian to an industrial society. Mass production allowed for a lot of things to be "dumbed" down.
The American history relative to personal competency isn't very attractive either. The railroads, industrialization of manufacturing, and exhausting our supply of "frontiers" created a new feudal system. The "new" nobility didn't think much of collective bargaining either- it was the late 1930's when the right of unions to exist and groups to bargain became a protected right.
Corporations began "taking care" of their employees. I'm not saying they did it out of altruism, rather they did it because unions demanded it or because they wanted to avoid unionization so they provided it proactively.
Employees of corporations began to expect their employer to provide employment security, health benefits, and retirement. Our labor relations laws still infer a lack of competence on the part of working people. Employees traded obedience for security and employers didn't include them in decisions about how we were going to do things. We have changed some of this with things like TQM, lean manufacturing, employee engagement programs, and other initiatives; but we still don't discuss many things with employees like adults.
Those things include : how we make decisions about compensation, factors affecting the costs of health care, and others. We don't always act like our employees are competent adults. What happened?
I like to think that my two models- Managing Whole People and Moving from Compliance to Commitment are in concert with what Jefferson and others had in mind with the right of personal competency. A system based on mutual respect, responsibility, information, rewards, and earned loyalty.
What do you think, is it time to go back to the future? Is personal competency both a right and a responsibility?
It would seem that back in the day the Founding Fathers wanted to ensure two very important rights that they felt were absent in the feudal societies and relationships that we left behind in Europe. Everybody is very familiar with personal property rights. Our right to own property, build a business, and generally prosper. You don't hear nearly as much about the right of personal competency; the right to express yourself, market your skills, and literally to "reinvent" yourself.
In Europe, and in fact in a lot of the world, your "destiny" was somewhat predetermined. Literally during the feudal period the "serfs" were tied to the land. You could not leave or relocate without your "Lord's" permission.
There were a lot of riots and other ugly history associated with collective bargaining as well, the right of individuals to bargain for the value of their services was not provided in that society.
In the early days we had what seemed to be an inexhaustible supply of land so anyone could "reinvent" themselves. Everybody was at least theoretically equal.
The Industrial Revolution changed a lot of things. We moved from an agrarian to an industrial society. Mass production allowed for a lot of things to be "dumbed" down.
The American history relative to personal competency isn't very attractive either. The railroads, industrialization of manufacturing, and exhausting our supply of "frontiers" created a new feudal system. The "new" nobility didn't think much of collective bargaining either- it was the late 1930's when the right of unions to exist and groups to bargain became a protected right.
Corporations began "taking care" of their employees. I'm not saying they did it out of altruism, rather they did it because unions demanded it or because they wanted to avoid unionization so they provided it proactively.
Employees of corporations began to expect their employer to provide employment security, health benefits, and retirement. Our labor relations laws still infer a lack of competence on the part of working people. Employees traded obedience for security and employers didn't include them in decisions about how we were going to do things. We have changed some of this with things like TQM, lean manufacturing, employee engagement programs, and other initiatives; but we still don't discuss many things with employees like adults.
Those things include : how we make decisions about compensation, factors affecting the costs of health care, and others. We don't always act like our employees are competent adults. What happened?
I like to think that my two models- Managing Whole People and Moving from Compliance to Commitment are in concert with what Jefferson and others had in mind with the right of personal competency. A system based on mutual respect, responsibility, information, rewards, and earned loyalty.
What do you think, is it time to go back to the future? Is personal competency both a right and a responsibility?
Labels: competency, employment, empowerment, engagement, Leadership
posted by Mark at New Paradigms LLC at
1:45 PM
1 Comments:
Hi Mark,
Just in these days, I'm reading "L'étrangeté francaise" by Philippe D'Iribarne (éditions du Seuil). I suppose we can translate the title: "The Specific of French".
In this book the writer try to identify what make French specific, in particular considering the concept of human being freedom in a society. He use a comparative approach, comparing French culture with Anglo- saxon (mainly north America) and German cultures.
One of the discussed points is the proud people in French have for the professional content of their labor activity. A proud that need a continuous balance against both the contractual and the hierarchical approaches in managing work relations.
Well, he considers that this proud, also in modern French is in evident difficulties as "no more compatible with the requirements (or expectations....) of the global economy".
May be a new equilibrium is needed; also considering the highly different starting points, about this issue, in different countries (for example USA and French).
May be this lecture could be of interest for your studies.
My 2 cents and: Merry Xmas & Happy New Year !
Domenico
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home