You Manage It article review
The article, “You Manage It!” is an exciting piece of work that attempts to establish whether or not money buys happiness. A 1974 study conducted by Richard Easterlin concluded that albeit rich people are happier than their poor counterparts, rich countries are not happier than poorer ones, and they do not grow happier as their wealth increases. The Easterlin paradox explained that only relative income determines one’s happiness and not absolute income.
Two Wharton professors, however, have come out to sharply criticize Easterlin’s point of view, claiming that his argument does not hold water. The following sums up their findings. First, rich people are generally happier than poor people. Secondly, more affluent countries are happier than poorer countries, and thirdly as countries get richer, they tend to get happier. The two professors claim that their findings are more substantial because they have access to unlimited data as compared to Easterlin, who had little data to work with 35 years ago. Easterlin has succumbed to these new findings, and he now concedes that people in wealthy countries do indeed exhibit higher levels of happiness in comparison to people from poorer states. He, however, still has doubts about whether money alone is the reason (Leonhardt, 2008).
Money acts as a motivator in any work setting. The more organizations pay their workers, the more they maximize their input for the company resulting in maximum output. Organizations should, therefore, worry about the wages and salaries they pay their employees since this will determine their level of commitment to the firm. A monetary reward system is an excellent strategy that firms can employ to bring the best out of their workers. Money also determines the level of life satisfaction. The more money one has, the more they tend to be comfortable in life. This is because it grants one access to other secondary services, such as excellent healthcare and luxury (Hamburgh, 2018).
I believe that an emphasis on financial incentives is good for organizations because of several reasons. First, handsome wages and salaries tend to attract top-notch talents or skilled employees who can provide their expertise to firms. Secondly, paying workers well is an indicator to them that the firm appreciates their input, hence, making them develop a sense of belonging to the company (“Can Money Buy Happiness? Learn About the Psychology of Happiness and Money,” 2018).
Some of the key learnings that can be extracted from this case include the following. First, money does indeed play a significant role in the level of happiness of the people. The more a country is wealthy, the more its citizens are happier. This is primarily because more funds will be allocated in various development projects such as the construction of numerous social amenities such as learning institutions, healthcare facilities, and other recreational facilities, thus improving the standards of living. Secondly, there is also the need for government policies to focus more on enhancing measures that directly affect happiness rather than focusing on growing a state’s GDP. This is especially for countries with struggling economies. Setting policies that immediately deal with people’s fundamental concerns means that a country does genuinely put the interests of its electorate first. It can go a long way in instilling the spirit of nationalism and patriotism among the public leading to higher levels of happiness. In conclusion, I would urge countries to borrow a leaf from the Himalayan Kingdom and replace their GDP with measures called “Gross National Happiness.”