🚀 go-pugleaf

This article is from Jim Hunt <seismo!mcvax!tucos!hunt@hplabs.HP.COM>
 and was received on Tue Oct  7 16:30:49 1986
 
Murray at Xerox wrote;
 
> I think the main reason for the performance monitoring debate is that
> the workers and management involved are in an adversary role...

> [comments anyone?  I think this is a bit of an overgeneralization.  There
> are a lot of subtle issues involved in places where there isn't an 
> adverserial role at all... -- Dave]

As an American working in Europe, I must add that the adversarial
relationship between management and workers is largely an American
phenomenon.  I see almost none of it here in Finland, perhaps because
they use a different source of performance improvement.

At this plant, a small electronics manufacturer with ~100 employees, they
are payed salary for the general jobs, and have the option of taking
jobs that pay directly on how many widgets get schnozzled in a day.

I am prepared to defend the statement that this results in moral improvement
and in higher productivity on the general jobs through a carry over effect.
And, of course, lots of widgets are getting schnozzled every day.
Granted, this is still adding stress to some, but it is optional.

Any response on American job stress vs. European?
Does anyone know of a place in America ( >= 100 emp. only) where
this is being done?  Is it working?

Jim Hunt	mcvax!tucos!hunt@seismo.css.gov

A student from Berkeley teaching CS to the faculty in Finland.