Because a person's worth is directly tied to how much value they can produce for their company's shareholders.
And if someone mediocre ends up being able to do the job, the company's management may face the fact that they're just a bunch of lame yuppies spending their life in the office to make someone else richer, not changing the world/making the world a better place/any other bullshit eaten from the trashcan of ideology (sniffff).
> Because a person's worth is directly tied to how much value they can produce for their company's shareholders.
Well, perceived value rather than actual value. Which might be pretty much equivalent in a field like Sales where it's easy to track figures, but much harder in fields like software.
And in the end, most people are near the centre of the bell-curve of talent, and still manage to produce plenty of value for themselves and their employer. Not everybody has to be extraordinary to keep the society ticking, and the perception that we should always be excellent isn't just counter-productive, but actively harmful (see what magazines did to people's body image).
And if someone mediocre ends up being able to do the job, the company's management may face the fact that they're just a bunch of lame yuppies spending their life in the office to make someone else richer, not changing the world/making the world a better place/any other bullshit eaten from the trashcan of ideology (sniffff).
reply