By BLR Founder and CEO Bob Brady
Harvard says we need happiness at work. But BLR’s founder says something else is even more important.
Once again Harvard University scholars have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to “discover” the obvious. After considerable research, the Harvardians concluded that workplaces are more productive when people are positive, cooperative, and trust the organization and its leaders.
The research was fingernails on the blackboard to some HR bloggers. The Training Day blog suggested that employers conduct “happiness training” as a way to develop the “work-based moods” that the study found to be key. And, at MyRagan.com, run by the employee communications guru, Mark Ragan, several Raganites positively gagged on the research, citing colleagues whose unrelenting over-happiness leaves depression in its trail. They stopped short of urging “unhappiness training,” but clearly they weren’t buying into the proposition that we can train employees to be happy.
Which leads to the question: Is “happiness” really important in the workplace?
If it is, what about successful businesses run by tyrants who rant and rave but somehow manage to stay profitable and even keep their employees and customers? Or organizations run by nice, sweet people who can’t keep staff or customers?
My theory is that success in business is about balance, not happiness.
In some fields, for example, extreme brilliance is the real driver. The brilliance can be artistic, athletic, scientific, technological, or even economic. This brilliance—sometimes in the form of a really good business model—is sufficient to balance unpleasant personal characteristics. It is the reason that some organizations survive—even thrive—in an atmosphere that is demeaning to employees.
Where Are We at BLR?
I can’t know where BLR would come out on the “happiness” scale (though we have been voted one of Connecticut’s best place to work 2 years running), but I do know that the blocking and tackling essential to business success depends on teamwork.
Teamwork improves individual contribution, making the sum of all of us a lot better than we would be individually. And teamwork thrives on trust, cooperation, and a positive work environment. (A “duh,” I know, but if Harvard can spend its super-endowment proving the obvious, indulge me my few words, puhleese!)
Which takes us back to the Harvard study: Despite everybody’s eagerness to pile on, its conclusion is dead-on accurate. Nancy Etcoff, Ph.D., the lead researcher of the study, titled 21st Century Well Being, Commitment, and Productivity, found that workers who are upbeat and positive affect office dynamics. Their presence can lead to greater productivity. Those of us who have spent a career in HR, trying to lead sometimes reluctant and uncomprehending employees and managers, couldn’t agree more.
In fact, the Training Day bloggers got it wrong when they characterized this as “happiness” and urged (in jest?) training sessions on the subject. The Harvard study is about something bigger than happiness. It is about emotional maturity and “life skills.”
Will Training Work? What You Can Do.
It is very difficult—maybe impossible—to change the behavior of adults unless they want to change. The best you can hope for through training is to enlighten people and make them think about changing. (And, in a workplace led by unenlightened, albeit “brilliant” autocrats, the training would probably be wasted.)
What we can do is in the area of hiring.
A column I wrote some months ago discussed the “life skills” that are important for successful careers. These include the ability to “manage emotion,” both up (happiness) and down (unhappiness). People who are too happy, too sad—or who go up and/or down too far, too often—can be difficult to manage and work with. They lack balance and can’t deal with the stress of everyday life. Bitterness, anger, etc., obviously make for an unproductive workplace—but unrealistic “happiness” can have the same effect, especially if it is followed by behavior swings.
When we hire at BLR, we look for emotional maturity and range. “Sad” people are not going to be suited for some career paths. But even people who are too “spunky*” may be unrealistic and headed toward disappointment.
Behavior is tough to identify, but it is the super-glue that holds the workforce together. It’s worth the effort to find folks who’ve got what you need to succeed.
That’s my E-pinion. I’d love to hear yours. Use the Share Your Comments button or e-mail me at RBrady@blr.com.
* “Spunk” was a hiring factor in the first episode of the 1970s sitcom, The Mary Tyler Moore Show. Mary is interviewed by Lou Grant. At the end, he says, “You know what? You’ve got spunk. I hate spunk.” He hired her anyway. They had good balance.
Happiness is extremely important, not the idiot laughter kind, but being content in the job; the tasks, the challenges, the co-workers, the environment, the benefits, and of course the pay. Will training help? If everyone understands what is expected of them, and theirr job is “safe”, I would think that is the beginnings of happiness.