Dear Reader,

Now and then I see workers performing and answering the same way anyone else could. That is nothing wrong in principle, as long as the answer is correct and the deliverables are reasonable.

However, it smells fishy when the script is reenacted over and over, to the point of perfection: in other words, to the point when you cannot distinguish the worker from anyone in the street anymore: the lazy bartender, the apathetic coworker, the formal-but-empty bureaucrat.

Then, questions start to creep, one above all others: “Why are we putting you on the payroll, and not… well, anyone else?”. Or worse: “Why don’t we train an AI to do your job in your place?”

The answer is simple, the implications straightforward: show me that you are useful, or get the hell outta here!

Second level implications are, however, harder to come by. “What you see is all there is” is what Daniel Kahneman keeps repeating like a mantra: you tend only to consider what is in front of you, and not what is missing.

Can you see what’s missing in the above reasoning? Hints: consider the workers, the triviality of their job, the fact that they need to add value…

Not there already?

What is missing is you (and me, for what I’m worth)

How do we fit into that equation? Are we adding value? Can our job be performed by anyone else or by a machine? Are we just another useless step in a process?

Until next time, don’t be afraid to try to add value.