There are some occupations (such as doctors, teachers, firemen, social workers etc) where people find meaning or a purpose in their work. And then there are other occupations (you know who you are) where there isn’t quite as much meaning. At least that is the general understanding. Of course, it is possible to find meaning in the most pedestrian of occupations as long as one is able to link it with larger goals such as providing for one’s family. But the question is, can people be made to find meaning in such work even when such nobler goals are unavailable. That is, will the presence of a very simple “purpose” allow people to see work differently even when it appears meaningless on the surface? That’s the question asked by three researchers who answered it with the help of two simple experiments.
Let's say you had the choice of giving one of two gift cards. One of them expires soon while the other expires much later. Which would be better to give? The latter, right? Not quite, say some behavioral economists. It appears that the one that expires sooner and therefore avoids procrastination makes people happier. That's right: people procrastinate even when it comes to pleasure. It could be that even with pleasures like using gift cards there are some costs associated (such as arranging for babysitting to go the spa) that loom much bigger in the immediate than in a distant future. So a spa visit in six months seems like a pleasure while one tomorrow looms (somewhat) ominously.
It is no secret that consumers often perceive a price-quality relationship, attributing higher quality to products for which they pay more. A large body of pricing research supports the existence of this phenomenon and it is not hard to find personal examples. But what happens when price is compared to objective quality as measured by say, Consumer Reports? Strangely, the relationship between price and quality almost completely disappears. Why? New research points to a placebo action in marketing whereby self-fulfilling expectations could lead lower priced products to perform worse. In other words the quality you get may be related to what you pay because you (unconsciously, it appears) deem it so.
In Mark Twain's classic novel Tom Sawyer is white washing a fence because his aunt told him to do it. In other words, it's work. But Tom soon convinces his friends that whitewashing the fence is a privilege and even gets them to pay him for a chance to try their hand at it. Twain makes the larger point that whether something is work or not is based on whether one gets paid for it. In this case work becomes a privilege when the worker has to pay to take part, as opposed to being paid for it. Based on this principle, two researchers have developed the idea of two markets: social and monetary. When you help a friend move with no mention of money it is a social market. When you get paid to mow someone's lawn it is a monetary market. Where do you expend more effort and does anything change the level of effort?
