Is happiness absolutely necessary in the workplace? I would say it just depends on who is in charge. I firmly believe that one must be happy in order to go about their daily lives, including their jobs. If one is not happy, then they will not be motivated to do their tasks. In “High Performance Happy,” Cliff Oxford argues that “happy-employee propagandists” do not have the right idea on what it takes to achieve a successful company and explains what motives employers should take in order to be affluent in the business industry. Oxford says there are two types of employees in a workplace: Human Resources Happy and High Performance Happy. Human Resources Happy employees are treated more like friends rather than colleagues. Oxford mentions
…show more content…
He says you need to get rid of the “duds”. All they do is the bare minimum and barely get by doing so. They are the ones to suck up to the boss and take any chance they get to check their social media accounts. These mannerisms will do one of two things for the company according to Oxford, “bring the high performance elite down to the middle or push them out the door” (9). This is why in order to run an outstanding business platform, you have to hire only the High Performance Happy people. They know what to do at all times and if they do not know, then they ask for help. Employers automatically just assume that they know what they are doing if they do not ask for help. Along with this comes key responsibility in this type of workforce. Employers should trust their employees with any decision that needs to be made; not just decisions about the work that is needed to be done, but they also have to trust them to handle their paid time off and any vacations they take. Trust is very important in this type of work. Oxford stresses that High performance organizations may not hire any family members. The reason for that, he says, is because it is hard to fire family members and the other employees may feel as if they have it easy because they are related to the one in charge. Jobs in these companies are competitive, therefore it is necessary to put in effort everyday and have to earn your spot. He …show more content…
When something like that comes up, you must ask if there is something you can help them with or if there is anything, whatsoever, that you can do for them. If they simply say no, then you must hurry and look for someone else; there is no time to cry about it. But when it comes to laying people off, it is hard and it honestly cannot be done. When you have hard-working people working for you, you simply cannot get rid of any of them. Oxford provides an example of this by referring to the time after the dot-com crash in 2001. His company lost about 20 percent of its revenue and the good news was that he only had to lay off 12 or 13 people (17). He looked at all the workers he had but had found nothing but High Performance Happy employees. So he decided that the 40 highest paid people would get a pay cut of 10 percent (18). To much of his surprise, other employees came to him wanting the exact same pay cut. This was the moment he realized that he ran a High Performance Happy
He says you need to get rid of the “duds”. All they do is the bare minimum and barely get by doing so. They are the ones to suck up to the boss and take any chance they get to check their social media accounts. These mannerisms will do one of two things for the company according to Oxford, “bring the high performance elite down to the middle or push them out the door” (9). This is why in order to run an outstanding business platform, you have to hire only the High Performance Happy people. They know what to do at all times and if they do not know, then they ask for help. Employers automatically just assume that they know what they are doing if they do not ask for help. Along with this comes key responsibility in this type of workforce. Employers should trust their employees with any decision that needs to be made; not just decisions about the work that is needed to be done, but they also have to trust them to handle their paid time off and any vacations they take. Trust is very important in this type of work. Oxford stresses that High performance organizations may not hire any family members. The reason for that, he says, is because it is hard to fire family members and the other employees may feel as if they have it easy because they are related to the one in charge. Jobs in these companies are competitive, therefore it is necessary to put in effort everyday and have to earn your spot. He …show more content…
When something like that comes up, you must ask if there is something you can help them with or if there is anything, whatsoever, that you can do for them. If they simply say no, then you must hurry and look for someone else; there is no time to cry about it. But when it comes to laying people off, it is hard and it honestly cannot be done. When you have hard-working people working for you, you simply cannot get rid of any of them. Oxford provides an example of this by referring to the time after the dot-com crash in 2001. His company lost about 20 percent of its revenue and the good news was that he only had to lay off 12 or 13 people (17). He looked at all the workers he had but had found nothing but High Performance Happy employees. So he decided that the 40 highest paid people would get a pay cut of 10 percent (18). To much of his surprise, other employees came to him wanting the exact same pay cut. This was the moment he realized that he ran a High Performance Happy