I was reading The Silkworm by Robert Galbraith, and found an exchange I really liked, that made me think about the different perspectives on entitlement and unreasonable expectations. I know (and those who read my thoughts here will know) that I'm pretty happy reading genre fiction, quick and relatively easy reads. I don't frequently read modern "literature". That being said, one of the things I love about the fiction I read is when the characterizations give rise to thoughts or insights about individuals, or humanity in general.
The Silkworm is the second book featuring Cormoran Strike, private detective. In the first novel, Cuckoo's Calling, Cormoran hired Robin as his temporary assistant, a role which soon became permanent.
Robin loves her job. She's excited by the prospect of working as a private detective, and finds fulfillment in being able to solve mysteries and actively help people. She turned down a permanent job in human resources at approximately twice the salary to work for Strike. When Strike agrees to keep her on, he suggests that he will train her to be an investigator as well. Robin's fiancé doesn't feel she's being employed to her full capacity, and is perhaps resentful she didn't take a higher paying job.
Strike has recently broken up with his girlfriend and (in the first book) is living in his office. In the second, his financial situation has improved somewhat and he is able to lease an attic room above his office. He wasn't sure he could afford Robin even at the temp agency salary, and (in my recollection) initially couldn't afford the referral fee payable to the agency directly. He's an army veteran, though there doesn't seem to be much in the way of a disability pension available to him. He borrowed money from his estranged father to establish the detective business and remains in significant debt.
In The Silkworm, Strike makes comments here and there about potentially hiring on an additional person to be the assistant investigator. Initially I thought he was planning a surprise for Robin, that the new employee would be an office assistant while he trained her as an investigator. But in fact, he is thinking of hiring an investigator while Robin continues as office assistant.
Robin feels betrayed by this, and increasingly angry at Strike. They ultimately have a confrontation where each describes their perspective. Is it resolved? Somewhat. Perhaps it's a little more pat than it would be in reality, but the fascinating thing for me is that the book (like its prequel), has chapters from Robin's perspective as well as those from Strike's, and leads up to that confrontation in a manner that lets the reader know exactly where the other party is coming from in a way that actual employee/employer interactions don't generally permit.
Robin's Perspective (Entitlement?)
Robin's fiancé is resentful. He doesn't like her working long hours for less pay than she could readily get at another job. Nevertheless, in spite of him, Robin continues to work loyally for Strike. I have a sense that they live farther away from the workplaces than they would like, partially due to their collective salaries. Robin goes far above and beyond what should be expected of an office assistant. She's always willing to do whatever task Strike sets for her. In return, she has not received the type of training she understood he promised her, and he's using her more and more as an office assistant and less as an investigator. When Strike starts talking about hiring an investigator, Robin starts getting resentful. As a result of his lack of appreciation for the extra work she does, she starts to cease work on the dot to get home at a decent hour, since if she's not happy at work she might as well make things better at home. She expects significant praise and recognition when she goes beyond her job description, particularly since Strike is not recognizing her significant contributions as an assistant investigator.
Strike sees this as a sense of entitlement. Robin does probably feel entitled, but in a manner which she believes is justified. Not, in my mind, different from many employees. Those who remain with a company out of their sense of loyalty, expecting that loyalty to be rewarded, but instead find themselves taken for granted, and promises of the employer (express or implied) get deferred and forgotten. Employees who love their job and don't want to leave, but feel that their loyalty isn't reciprocated. Employees who expect recognition and appreciation for the good job they do (whether rewarded at the time or not), but who expect that their accomplishments and the times they went above and beyond will be remembered at the next promotion opportunity.
Strike's Perspective (Unreasonable Expectation?)
Robin initially seemed enthusiastic about the job. She was working for a temp agency, now she has regular employment in a job she likes to do. She's his office assistant, and from time to time he sees that she gets an opportunity to participate more directly in his business. His business is on a shoe string at best, he's living at (or over) the office, does not have a lot of money to spare for raises and promotions (as Robin well knows, and knew when she took the job). He works evenings and weekends, frequently all night, maintaining surveillances on his own without back-up. Robin doesn't volunteer to work any time outside the 9-5 and expects to work primarily or exclusively during office hours. Investigative surveillance (as Robin knows) doesn't just happen during the working hours. Increasingly he's noticed Robin is intent on leaving right on the dot of closing, and that she's uncomfortable with being asked to put in any extra hours or time, needing to clear it with her fiancé. As a result, Strike concludes Robin's making a clear choice not to be an integral part of the business, not to share in the highs and lows, but just to draw a salary. He needs someone who is prepared to actively participate in the business, and be vested in outcomes, not merely their paycheck. If that's not Robin, he'll find someone who is.
Robin thinks Strike's expectations are unreasonable and don't take into account her past service and her dedication to the job. Strike bases his conclusions on his needs for the business and what he sees her do, not what she's giving up to do it, or her difficulties at home that make it an accomplishment to participate to the extent she does. Strike needs to be able to get someone who can increase the revenue of his business or make it easier for him to operate his business on his own. He doesn't need someone who's just another cost centre.
In the result, each is looking at the role of the employee from their own vantage. Robin looks at how employment fits into her life, and choices she makes to be able to be Strike's employee. Strike is looking at how employment helps him and fits into his model for his business. Each wants the most for and from what they are doing.
So who's unreasonable here? As I say, it's fascinating to get a truly empathic understanding of each perspective, and I commend Ms. Rowling (aka Mr. Galbraith) for being able to show it so clearly. I think as a reader my sympathies lie with Robin, though it's close.
From a broader perspective, where would my sympathies lie? It's a tougher question. For myself, I think employers underestimate the value of loyalty, and the value driven by someone who loves their job and will go above and beyond their job role. I suspect too often employers seek the new, the flashy, the lateral hires, always looking to the other side of the fence without giving sufficient weight to the value of happy, loyal and dedicated employees, even if they aren't performing in each and every respect an employer could dream up. From the employee's perspective, I think too often employees allow resentment to build up without reminding employers of the value they have. Employers have short memories, and good work will either be forgotten by the next crisis or become part of the baseline expectation. Employers who are challenged in meeting their employee costs will wonder why they should thank employees for merely doing their job, and take as a given that the employees should have the best interests of the business at heart. Sometimes perhaps, employees need the opportunity, like Robin, to sit down with their employer and remind them of instances where they went above and beyond, tell them how loyal they are and their love for their job, but also point out when that is being jeopardized by employers taking them for granted or forgetting commitments and promises the employee was counting on.
No comments:
Post a Comment