Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For me, I try to go above and beyond so that I can feel I am contributing to the success of the company that hired me. I have pride in myself and my work, so why would I not go above and beyond if it results in a more successful outcome for me and my company?
Why just do the bare minimum because that is all that is required to get that paycheck? Some people are happy with that. I am not one of those people.
There is not always any official recognition at a workplace of extra efforts and diligence by an employee. Such a worker will have to internalize the satisfaction gained from doing things better than required. But your own self-estimation is what counts the most, because no one knows you as well as you do. But that doesn't give you any more money, if that's essential to you.
Sometimes, doing extra work or doing it better can produce negative rewards. Fellow employees may resent you for being a "work-breaker", (setting a higher standard that they will have to match). I once was the senior of 4 workers in a segment of a small department of 9 people. I did a lot of extra things and got along well with clients of the company. When they hired a new, ambitious supervisor to regiment us, he immediately recognized me as a threat to him and his position. For the next two years, he never passed-up a chance to make things tough for me or to claim I'd committed some fault, when none had occurred.
Some of our biggest clients wouldn't even talk to him over the phone, or allow him to come to their offices, as they had been offended by him. I or someone else had to communicate with them. The Big-Boss never took any action against him, except finally telling him that he had to co-exist with me. When I eventually gave him my notice, because I was returning full-time to college, he looked like he wanted to break into a victory dance. He double-timed to the HR office to give them his good news about my departure.
Talking years later with the employee I'd trained to take my position, I found that over time, this supervisor had advanced his skill at being an annoying jackass to an art form. When he finally left the job, the employees threw a party (I was invited). But the party wasn't for him, it was a celebration that he was gone. Sadly, there's more to the story. The guy they hired to take his place was twice as bad and there was a 100% turnover in the department within 6 months.
The actions the clients took vs what you had to put up with is the difference between ownership class and non ownership class. The clients are other owners and dont have to put up with crap. This is why violence happens in a society, mostly by non ownership class.
Why should I?
I get paid the same at the end of the day weather I do more or less work so why should I right?
I haven't read the whole thread, but I suspect most of the responses will say, "It's your obligation to do your best," "You owe whatever to the company," blah blah blah. I don't think so though. So far I haven't found a reason to. Raises and other perks seem to be random, but I have found that having a good attitude helps you get promotions and a raise. You should do the bare minimum, however, or you are at risk of getting fired.
In a perfect world, going above and beyond your job scope shows you take initiative to do other things to contribute to the company. That usually goes noticed very well, and will factor into the company's decision to invest more in you.
In an imperfect world, going above and beyond your job scope becomes necessary as workloads in other areas have increased, the accountable work groups failed to live up to their responsibility, and the company does not have shiitake together. If it gets down to the point of you being punished for going above and beyond and those not doing their jobs are rewarded, the first and second-level supervisors need to be held accountable.
If we have to explain why , you wouldn't understand anyway. But basically, it is what separates a mediocre employee from a valued employee. Also, some personal pride of accomplishment enters into the picture here too.
Don
Thats only true if management cares or notices. Most of the time they do neither.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
