Do Nothing That Is Not Play
If we think about it calmly for but a moment, one logical outcome of nonviolence is folks not working for a living, but playing for a living.
Many companies seem desperate for “innovation”. Is innovation more like to come about through folks doing what they’re told (“working”) or through playing with things, as they see fit? I posit the latter is far more likely.
And no, this is not some flight of fancy. Do we really embrace wholehearted the set of assumptions labelled by Douglas McGregor as Theory-Y?
Theory-Y assumptions are: (1) physical and mental effort are natural and most people (depending on the work environment) find work to be a source of satisfaction, (2) they generally, on their own motivation, exercise self-control, self-direction, creativity, and ingenuity in pursuit of individual and collective (company) goals, (3) they either seek responsibility or learn to accept it willingly, and that (4) their full potential is not tapped in most organisations.
Could it be that folks’ “full potential is not tapped in most organisations” because they are obliged to “work” rather than play?
Could it be that engagement (and productivity) would take an amazing leap forwards if we invited folks to “play” rather than “work”?
Could you have the courage to experiment to find out for yourself?
Or are we all so in thrall to what Walter Wink calls The Domination System that play as an alternative to work is undiscussable?
Serious Play ~ Michael Schrage
The Importance of Play (A Valentine for Marshall Rosenberg, part 2) ~ John Kinyon
What If #7 – No Work ~ Think Different
The Human Side of Enterprise ~ Douglas McGregor
Theories of Motivation ~ Think Different