Here is an excerpt from an article written by Tera Allas and Brooke Weddle for the McKinsey Quarterly, published by McKinsey & Company. To read the complete article, check out others, learn more about the firm, and sign up for email alerts, please click here.
* * *
As record numbers of workers quit their jobs, companies are busy trying to figure out how to make working conditions at their organization more attractive and more sustainable. Many companies boast flexible hours, good benefits, and, of course, higher pay. And some go further, looking closely at how roles in the organization can fulfill people’s psychological needs.
Business leaders recognize these emotional needs—whether it is the sense of reward workers have when they accomplish something, the frustration they feel when being micromanaged, the anger they experience after being treated unfairly, the longing they feel to be part of a group, or the desire they have for their work be interesting and meaningful.
Yet many leaders mistakenly believe that only other professionals who have enjoyed similar success—and the financial rewards that come with it—truly value the nonfinancial aspects of their work. As we show in this article, that is simply not true.A
People in lower-paying jobs also want their psychological needs at work to be satisfied. Yet data show that those needs are typically going unmet, far more often than is the case for higher earners.
Some of this may be unavoidable: for example, there is only so much autonomy one can feasibly grant a production line worker, while the job of a truck driver may be inherently lacking in social contact. However, most jobs could be enhanced to provide a much greater degree of psychological satisfaction.
In this article, we share novel data and analysis that illustrate the premium placed by all workers on psychologically satisfying work and how current work practices appear to be exacerbating existing inequalities. We also look at what business leaders can do to address the psychological needs of their lower-earning employees.
The good news is that, for the most part, companies have direct control over actions that can improve matters. Moreover, many of the practices that are needed—while requiring some time and effort—do not typically call for direct cash outlays. In fact, better satisfying workers’ psychological needs tends to correlate with higher revenues and profits.
Most people, across all income levels, believe that having an interesting job is as important as having a solid income
For thousands of years, philosophers have argued about what constitutes a “good life”—a life with more progress, pleasure, or purpose. Now, modern sciences—neuroscience, endocrinology (hormones), psychology, anthropology, and evolutionary biology, among others—have caught up. All agree: there is much more to being a human than surviving and procreating.
In a way, Maslow’s famous hierarchy of needs was both right and wrong at the same time. On the one hand, it recognized that people have many desires in addition to basic bodily needs such as water, food, and shelter. On the other hand, it assumed a fixed hierarchy where psychological needs—such as belonging and self-esteem—became relevant only after basic physical and safety needs were met. However, modern research has shown that these needs exist in parallel and that a person’s well-being can be enhanced—for example, by good social relationships— their basic physical and safety needs are not completely fulfilled.
It is no longer a surprise that people seek more from their employers than just a paycheck and a safe place to work. A preponderance of evidence suggests that “good work” also means satisfying employees’ psychological needs.
At all levels of income, the most important drivers of people’s job satisfaction were interpersonal relationships and having an interesting job.
McKinsey’s recent analysis of the reasons why employees are leaving their jobs in record numbers (, or what many call the Great Resignation) showed that the most important factors were social and psychological, including not feeling valued by their organization or manager or not having a sense of belonging at work.
o A quantitative analysis of more than 16,000 workers globally in 2015 showed that at all levels of income, the most important factors determining people’s job satisfaction were interpersonal relationships and having an interesting job—each accounting for around 20 percent of the explainable variation. In contrast, the level of pay accounted for only 4 percent of the variation in people’s job satisfaction.
o In a representative global survey of nearly 50,000 people across 38 countries, more than 60 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “I would enjoy having a paid job even if I did not need the money.” Only around 40 percent agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “A job is just a way of earning money—no more.”
o In the same survey, across all occupations and income levels, only 16 percent of respondents rated “high income” as more important than having “an interesting job.” As shown in Exhibit 1, the average importance placed on “an interesting job” was on par with or higher than “high income” in all occupational groupings, .
Yet companies do a better job of addressing the psychological needs of higher-earning employees than lower-earning colleagues
One of the most prominent models of human motivation, extensively applied to organizational and employment research, is the self-determination theory by psychologists Richard Ryan and Edward Deci. According to this theory, as well as a large body of empirical evidence, all employees have three basic psychological needs—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—and satisfying these needs promotes high-quality performance and broader well-being. Additional studies, including McKinsey’s own research, have also found a link between (for both employer and employee) and employee engagement, often embodied in questions about the degree to which positive outcomes employees consider their work to be interesting, and purposeful.
Drawing on this literature, as well as a large global data set generated by the International Social Survey Programme, we looked at how well employees’ psychological needs are satisfied in different types of occupations, ranging from managerial and professional jobs to lower-paid roles, such as those in customer service, cleaning, and waste disposal. Given the data available, we focused on five psychological needs: competence (related to the concept of mastery), autonomy (related to control and agency), relatedness (including positive relationships), meaning (proxied by how interesting individuals find their jobs), and purpose (proxied by how proud individuals are of their organizations)
The results are fascinating (Exhibit 2). First, the good news: on a net basis (deducting those who “disagree” or “strongly disagree” from those who “agree” or “strongly agree”) across all occupations, a greater proportion of workers feel that their psychological needs are satisfied. Even for those with the worst net score—plant and machine operators and assemblers who were asked about feelings of competence—around 48 percent said that they could use “almost all” or “a lot” of their past experience and skills, versus 23 percent who said that they could use “almost none” of their skills on the job. Similarly, while 23 percent of workers in elementary occupations (such as cleaners, couriers, and waiters) didn’t find their jobs to be interesting, more than half did.
* * *
Here is a direct link to the complete article.