Equality
is a fallacy. Nothing was created equal. The concept of equality is propagated
by those who have no idea of the efficiency equation. Neither God nor man has
found means adequate enough to equalise input and output. Newton’s third law of
motion notwithstanding, equality exists only in theory. HR practitioners who
advocate treating the workforce with the yardstick of equality is involved in
something that actually does not exist and pursuing something detrimental to the
growth and health of the organisation.
Consider
two individuals holding similar positions, with the same job description and
responsibility in the same organisation. The organisation expects both the
individuals to put in equal work, with the same expected level of dedication. Since
equality of labour and compensation is an accepted norm, both the individuals
have to be compensated equally for holding similar job titles or positions. Despite
what each individual may contribute, both would end up being remunerated
equally unless there is an effective system of performance linked compensation.
This is one of the reason that governmental organisations are often infested
with incompetent inefficient ineffective staff. Why should one person work and
contribute more than the other, when there is no incentive to do so?
Absence
of accountability is a common phenomenon in an organisation where equality job
positions and remuneration is enforced. Despite differentials in input, if
returns are equalised, there is no incentive for an individual to invest more
than the other is his job. It goes against the basic tenant of ROI. Highly
competitive fields like marketing where performance is monitored by numbers and
compensated appropriately, one finds that individuals perform better.
It
is difficult, if not impossible, for a person to treat two different
individuals equally. How hard one may try, inter personnel relations,
organisational dynamics and other unspoken elements dictate how one treats the
other. The ability of the superior to handle a subordinate and extract the
required quantum and quality of work output would also differ from person to
person. Positional authority necessarily may not ensure equal extraction of
output. The skill with which situations are handled, subordinates controlled,
motivated and monitored will differ from person to person.
It
is only when there is a sense of inequality can there be growth, competition
and fulfilment. HR practitioners must create a robust system which ensures
adequacy in compensation and objective accounting of the job quantum associated
to each individual. Superiors must focus on creating a sense of inequality
amongst competing individuals. While inequality introduced must create
differentials between individuals that spot competition and growth, care must
be taken that it does not degenerate into institutional discrimination against
some. This is a fine art and cannot be mastered without practice. Superiors
must provide subordinates with opportunities for growth and the wherewithal
required. The dictum of treating subordinates equally is neither practical nor
advisable and necessarily need not be pursued.
