In Defense of a Job; Not a Calling
As the leader of the organization, you want the people under you to be passionate about what they do. To find meaning and fulfillment in their work. To put their whole self into what they do. When they do this, you know that they are committed. That this is more than just a job; it’s a career. Maybe even a calling.
This type of commitment to one’s work is called affective commitment, which is an emotional relationship with what a person does and, by extension, the organization that provides that work. A leader’s desire for that type of commitment from their subordinates is a laudable aim. After all, affective commitment is strongly associated with better work as well as happier workers.
What is often frowned upon are those people who consider their job to be just that — a job. They clock in on the dot and clock out on the dot. They do what they are asked so that they can get a paycheck to go do what they want. They don’t plan their next move or set lofty career goals. They expend their emotional bandwidth and create their identity outside of work.
For a leader dedicated to their organization, their team, and their career, this can seem like a flaw in character or even an insult to the organization that the leader has worked so hard to build. Why, you may think, would someone want to spend eight hours a day on something that doesn’t help them grow? That doesn’t provide satisfaction and personal fulfillment?
The answer is two-fold. First, we must understand that life can and will throw anyone a curveball that can force us to re-evaluate. The type of commitment one has to their work can and will change. A man who is a passionate, career-oriented worker who finds that his husband has been diagnosed with cancer may withdraw that emotional work investment, preferring to save his emotional bandwidth for supporting his spouse. Or perhaps a woman who was suddenly and harshly laid off from her dream job will decide to invest her identity outside of work in activities that she has more control over. These decisions to reduce one’s emotional investment in work are completely logical and sometimes necessary for better mental health.
Second, we need to appreciate that identity and meaning constructed outside of work can be incredibly valuable for organizations and society. The man who finds his highest satisfaction in being a father is more likely to raise mentally and emotionally strong children. The woman who pours her paycheck into new guitars and recording equipment can also be the one who you turn to when your organization wants to launch a professional-quality podcast. Appreciating who people are outside of work fosters a work environment that increases the chance of affective commitment as people’s lives change and they start to reevaluate.
Your organization, your team, is your baby. And just like real babies, those who work for you get to determine how they shape their lives. Your job as a leader is to create a place where workers are treated well, know what they need to do, and have the resources they need to do it. When those boxes are checked, you can hold them to the expectation that they do their job well, while at the same time appreciating the greatness they produce in their own lives.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human resource management review, 1(1), 61–89.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of vocational behavior, 61(1), 20–52.
