Talent Wants to Be In Control

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Shubha Ghosh says:

    Matt’s post his many a nail on the head with one small smack to the thumb towards the end. I think questions of governance are an explicit part of my point on understanding the organizational structure within which creativity occurs. My concerns are with an uncritical embrace of freedom and an equally uncritical embrace of organization (and loyalty) as a flight from the dark side of freedom. The governance structures suggested by Matt are the right ones to think about, especially what I would describe as cooperative organizations. I do think there are ways to get around the collective action problems posed, in theory, by these entities. Examples ranging from the work of Elinor Ostrom to Union Cab in Madison, WI (touted by Jim Hightower as a model for worker cooperatives) support the point that Matt and I share about different forms of organizations. The answer lies in recognizing a plurality of governance structures in order to move beyond false dichotomies of freedom and loyalty, or individualism and collectivism. That is why I have to strongly disagree with Matt’s point about independent contractors. That would be awful, an every worker for herself option, that represents the distributional concerns noted by Frank and Brett, and the kind of freedom as anarchy that I find troubling. Such radical freedom has strong appeal in American culture, whether articulated by a Hoffman or a Cruz. Also do keep in mind that the Jeffersonian economy was base, at least implicitly, on slavery. Perhaps Jefferson wanted to move towards “contract labor” but one can speculate how that contract may have worked in practice.