Deconstructing Entitlement

Entitlement - it’s a loaded word and one we’d like to highlight as it seems to be thrown around a lot these days, particularly aimed at the younger generations. What exactly does it mean? In business, culturally, and societally? 

Dictionary.com defines “entitled” as: “to give (a person or thing) a title, right, or claim to something.”

We’d like to focus this week on what’s “right” and who’s to say what’s right or wrong, particularly in the workforce.

It’s safe to assume that professional standards of behaviour, rules, expectations and personal conduct in the business setting are all in place as a collective agreement between management and employees: to maintain standards of business, conduct, safety, professional well being, and a universal understanding and agreement of how business will be conducted and executed. Rules don’t necessarily always work perfectly, but they are in place intentionally and for a reason, for the good of the enterprise and collective professional community. When this agreement is reached (engaging professionals for work etc.), there is an expectation and understanding that work will be performed, salaries will be paid, and everyone understands the rules of the professional road. Right? These days, not always..

Overall, we’re trending towards a far more individualized society where personal opinions, exceptions, and rule flouting, and where the questioning decisions that are made to keep us functioning as a whole, are becoming much more ubiquitous, as opposed to thinking about striving for the greater good for our business community as a collective. The message seems to be, “We know better.” But DO we? Sure, we know what might be right for us, individually, but is it right for the greater good?

Many of us have been raised being told, “You’re special;” “Your opinions matter and are important;” “You’re perfect just the way you are;” and, “You’re entitled to your opinions” - all of which may be true. However, we fear that  this thinking has begun to erode our sense of community, in business and in our personal lives, and has nurtured a far more individualized society leading to a decreased approach towards a shared experience. Consent and adherence to accepted norms are critical - even if we sometimes disagree - and they are becoming elusive.

One of the managers I work with was struggling with a particular employee who suffers from depression. Now, anyone who knows me knows that I have the utmost empathy and understanding for mental health issues, so I say this with that in mind: it is NOT the job of an employer to “fix” their employees. Understand? Absolutely. Help them find help? Definitely. But if an employee can’t perform their agreed to duties, it’s up to the employer to recognize THEIR professional needs, how the needs of the individual are interfering with the careful execution of their work, and figure out how to compensate for it. Depression is not an excuse, but rather a human call for help. This is where we get to the tricky task of separating business from humans. If an employee - for any reason -  cannot perform her duties, sure, it’s up to management to recognize and adjust - whether it’s  reducing the workload (with a salary adjustment), offering a leave of absence, or providing resources for help - with kindness and understanding. But if the work isn’t getting done, it isn’t getting done, and the employment agreement has been compromised. Getting sucked into the individual troubles of each employee compromises the functionality of the whole.

There are SO many examples of people living in an individualized society: Drivers not following speed limits and getting pissed when the driver in front of them won’t do the same, thinking, “They’re in my way!” Not following the vaccine age guidelines, and jumping ahead of their turns - because they need the vaccine immediately - because they’re more important than the rest of the 300 million people waiting their turn, of course. People fighting about walking through a metal detector because they disagree and the exercise infringes on their  individual rights. I saw a YouTube video recently where a woman was asked, very politely, by police to please step outside with them to answer a few questions. Instead of respecting and complying with the officer, she vehemently resisted and claimed that the officer was “infringing on her personhood,” “violating her constitutional rights,” and “kidnapping her” instead of just getting up and answering the officers’ questions, because she didn’t want to go. Hell, going through the express checkout lane at the supermarket with double the allotted number of items, because they’re in a hurry. And the list goes on, (I defy you, dear reader, not to notice examples of the individualized nature of our society and personal entitlement every single day after reading this).

Presumably, we all know, in our hearts, the difference between right and wrong; what’s the right thing to do and what probably isn’t the best decision. I worry that we’re no longer paying attention. Is it right for you to ask for special accomodations at work, even if it interferes with getting the larger job done? Because you’re special? Because you deserve it? Because you’re entitled? Probably not. Sometimes the needs of the whole supersede the needs of the individual; they just do. Rules are there for a reason, and there’s a reason for everything if we stop to ask why and agree - or not - that’s absolutely our individual choice, but if you agree to follow the rules, you don’t get to break them.

“May we know Unity without Conformity,” said Dwight Eisenhower in his inauguration address to the nation. Unity is a shared experience, not an individual one.

Until next time…...