In a recent Harvard Business Review post, The Problem of Forced Fun, guest contributor Grant McCracken makes an unexpected and fascinating observation:
When we commandeer the emotional lives of our employees we waste a valuable resource. Left to their own devices, employees represent a wonderful variety of attitudes, interests and activities. They are in fact a very good opportunity for the corporation to survey what is happening “out there” in the world. When we ask them to be outward facing ambassadors for the corporation, we flatten their naturally occurring variety, making it much more difficult for them to serve as inward facing ambassadors for the world.
McCracken, a research affiliate at Convergence Culture Consortium at MIT, is the author of Chief Culture Officer—in which he makes a convincing case that corporations need someone who’s focused on understanding popular culture and anticipating trends. In the HBR post he suggests that using employees to put a happy face on the company has unexpected consequences.
Worth considering: Employee testimonials on the Careers site may seem more authentic if they reflect diverse attitudes and orientations.
Careening to an entirely different viewpoint, we can look at the Scott Adams theory of job satisfaction, as expounded on Dilbert.com:
My theory is that your degree of job satisfaction is largely a function of who you blame for the necessarily unpleasant job you have. If you blame yourself, that’s when cognitive dissonance sets in and your brain redefines your situation as “satisfied.” To do otherwise would mean you deliberately keep yourself in a bad situation for no good reason, assuming you believe you have options. Your brain likes to rationalize your actions to seem consistent with the person you believe you are.
The post goes on to expound a circuitous method for improving employee satisfaction by convincing workers there are better jobs elsewhere. Worth a read—and don’t skip the comments, which include some surprisingly long, serious responses.
Finally, a few facts about happy/unhappy job-holders. According to the most recent Conference Board report on job satisfaction in the United States, only 45% of those surveyed were satisfied with their jobs . . .
“While one in 10 Americans is now unemployed, their working compatriots of all ages and incomes continue to grow increasingly unhappy,” says Lynn Franco, director of the Consumer Research Center of The Conference Board. “Through both economic boom and bust during the past two decades, our job satisfaction numbers have shown a consistent downward trend.”
Job satisfaction is also at an all-time low in the United Kingdom, according to a recent report from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) report.
None of which is surprising, in light of findings from the 2009 Employee Job Satisfaction Survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). The top five determiners of employee satisfaction:
- job security
- benefits
- compensation
- opportunities to use skills and abilities
- feeling safe in the work environment
All those factors are in increasingly short supply, so there may not be much room for employers to improve the situation at that level. However—the next five determiners offer a lot more room for positive action:
- relationship with immediate supervisor
- management recognition of employee job performance
- communication between employees and senior management
- the work itself
- autonomy and independence
So . . . maybe Careers sites should focus more on communicating positive messages about the second set of desirables?

Gartner also predicts that companies will become more open to employees using both business and personal social networks for business purposes, but with that change in policy will come the need for companies to create specific guidelines for use. According to a study by Manpower (via 

The original Apple logo was created by one of the lesser-known founders of Apple Computer Co., Ronald Wayne. It’s hard to even notice the apple hanging from the tree above Sir Isaac Newton’s head in this image. The text that borders the image (which is too small to read at any size) reads, “Newton… A Mind Forever Voyaging Through Strange Seas of Thought … Alone.” It’s not surprising that this logo only lasted a year as the primary tangible symbol of the Apple brand. There is really nothing positive that you can say about it in terms of branding a technology company.
The rainbow apple is the logo that most consumers saw in their introduction to the Apple brand. Apple brand champion Steve Jobs, himself, hired graphic designer Rob Janoff of the Regis McKenna Advertising Agency to design the new logo, and the final design chosen — the rainbow apple — worked. According to some reports, Janoff has claimed the bite taken out of the apple was intended to show people that the image was an apple, not a tomato, and it was a play on words between “bite” and the technical term “byte”.
One year after Steve Jobs returned to the helm of Apple (after he was ousted from the company years earlier), he called for a logo update, and what came out of this redesign was a color change from the dated rainbow palette to a modern monochromatic version that was also highly web-friendly. The primary color for this Apple logo, which is still used today, is chrome, but it has appeared in other colors as well. In a word, the new logo was sleek and matched the new direction Jobs planned to take the company. The monochrome Apple logo has even been reported as stimulating the brain and making people who are exposed to it more creative (according to a