There have been some very interesting responses to this thread, and I've
enjoyed reading them. A response I was hoping to see, but haven't yet
(perhaps I'm the only one bothered by this particular thing) is one that
I'll share now.
I've always wondered what kind of relationship is created when we use the
term, "employee." I "feel" that it conveys the sense of a hired hand (or
hired brain, or whatever). The relationship is always a transactional one
between employees and employer...even when the relationship seemed to be
something else (paternal, familial, clan or tribal, etc).
Laws, tradition, political and social mental models tend to bring us into
the employee/employer relationship. Yet, most of us have witnessed the
difference between "joining" an organization and being "hired." With all
of the work associated with attempting to "join" people and organization
together, (rather than just trying to "hire" hands), it seemed to me that
it might be useful to begin changing our sustaining terms.
Employee benefits...employee retention...the dreaded employee handbook,
all of the reminders that everyone is really just an employee. While this
may be legally correct, is there anything wrong with using words that
identify the relationship in more positive, human terms?
I know that this can get carried away...like most discussion on words and
semantics seem to do. But, is it possible we could improve on retaining
our colleagues and friends if we eliminated the use of the word employee
from our mental models and our lexicon?
regards,
Doc
------------------
"The salvation of the world lies in the human heart." -Vaclav Havel
Richard Charles Holloway -
P.O. Box 2361, Olympia, WA 98507 USA Telephone 253.539.4014 or 206.568.7730
Thresholds <http://www.thresholds.com>
Meeting Masters <http://www.thresholds.com/meeting.html>
--"Richard Charles Holloway" <learnshops@thresholds.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>