Job that: The least stressful job that pays over $100K, according to data

The least stressful job that pays over $100K, according to data

Hill Street Studios | DigitalVision | Getty Images

Stress on the job is a common phenomenon. A majority of workers, 79%, experience work-related stress month-to-month, according to the American Psychological Association’s 2021 Work and Well-being Survey of 1,501 U.S. adults.

Some jobs, however, are less stressful than others. The Department of Labor’s Occupational Information Network, or O*NET, ranked 873 occupations by level of stress by noting the importance of accepting criticism and dealing calmly with high-stress situations in each job. And some of those relatively low stress jobs also pay handsomely.

The least stressful job on the list that pays more than $100,000 per year is environmental economist, with a ranking of 52 out of 100. It pays a median annual salary of $105,630, according to O*NET.

The position calls for conducting research on environmental topics like public and private land use, air and water pollution and endangered species preservation. It calls for presenting the results of said research in articles or presentations and for assessing the benefits of environmental policies and regulations.

Most environmental economists need a relevant master’s degree or Ph.D to get hired, as well as some work experience.

In terms of why the job might be comparatively lower stress, “They’re not working in very competitive conditions,” says Sinem Buber, lead economist at ZipRecruiter. Some of these positions could be done in governments or universities, which could hold more job security. They’re also less competitive than economist roles at businesses, where workers have to help meet a certain bottom line.

Environmental economists also have a great deal of freedom within their role, according to 81% of O*NET’s respondents.

Plus, “it’s really a fulfilling job,” says Buber, “knowing that you are doing something good for the environment, that you’re doing something good for humanity. It gets them going every single day. “

If you’re considering doing the work to become an environmental economist yourself, keep in mind, all job experiences are relative, and no job is stress-free altogether.

“I think it would be challenging to find a job that had zero stress,” says Vicki Salemi, career expert at Monster, even this one. “It’s important to emphasize this is lower stress. It doesn’t mean there’s no stress at all.” And even if the job itself is relatively lower stress, a “toxic environment can amplify your stress tremendously” if you’re not getting along with your boss or colleagues, she says.

Make sure to speak to people who work at an organization you’re applying for while still in the interview process to a get a sense of the culture on the inside. Having as much information as possible can help you avoid toxic work environments, regardless of your role.

Check out:

10 low-stress jobs that pay more than $100,000 per year and how to get them

$2 million ranges, deleted job posts: NYC’s salary transparency law is off to a rocky start

Hiring is still booming in some industries, but falling in others—and job seekers are worried

Sign up now: Get smarter about your money and career with our weekly newsletter

How Americans view their jobs

On the whole, American workers are generally satisfied with their jobs. Even so, a significant share (30%) view the work they do as “just a job to get them by,” rather than a career or a steppingstone to a career. Views about work are sharply divided along socio-economic lines, and the sense of vulnerability is most acute among workers with no college education and lower-than-average household incomes.

There are also significant differences across industries and occupations. For example, people who work in management are more likely to be satisfied with their current job, to be in salaried positions and to have a more robust set of employer-provided benefits. By contrast, workers who are in retail, service or manual occupations have fewer benefits and lower levels of satisfaction.

About half of U.S. workers describe their job as a career, while 18% say it is a steppingstone to a career. Three-in-ten workers say their job is “just a job to get them by.” Those who describe their job as a career tend to be at least 30 years old and well educated, with higher incomes and holding full-time, salaried jobs.

Highly educated workers among the most satisfied with their jobs

About half (49%) of American workers say they are very satisfied with their current job. Three-in-ten are somewhat satisfied, and the remainder say they are somewhat dissatisfied (9%) or very dissatisfied (6%). Job satisfaction varies by household income, education and key job characteristics. And the way people feel about their job spills over into their views of other aspects of their lives and their overall sense of happiness.

About six-in-ten (59%) of those with an annual family income of $75,000 or more say they’re very satisfied with their current job, compared with 45% of those making $30,000 to $74,999 and 39% of those making less than $30,000.

Certain types of employees are more likely to express satisfaction with their current job. People who work in management are particularly likely to say they are very satisfied (62%), compared with, for example, those who work in manual or physical labor (48%). In addition, those who work in full-time jobs (52%), salaried positions (58%) and permanent positions (53%) are particularly likely to say they are very satisfied with their current job.

When asked about their satisfaction with the kind of work they do, employed Americans with high family incomes again say they are the most satisfied (65% of those making $75,000 or more say they are very satisfied, compared with 49% of those making $30,000 to $74,999 and 51% of those making less than $30,000). Permanent, full-time and salaried employees are also more likely than their counterparts to say they are very satisfied in this area.

Similar patterns are reflected when Americans are asked about satisfaction with their family life and personal financial situation, as well as their overall happiness.

For example, about six-in-ten adults (61%) with a family income of less than $30,000 per year say they are very satisfied with their family lives, compared with eight-in-ten adults whose family income is $75,000 per year or more.

There is also a difference by education. Though 71% of Americans overall describe themselves as very satisfied with their family lives, that figure is lower among those with less than a high school education (64%) than those with at least a bachelor’s degree (75%).

About a third of Americans (32%) say they are very happy with how things are going these days in their lives, while 51% describe themselves as pretty happy and 14% say they are not too happy.

Large differences in happiness emerge when comparing those with high levels of education and income and those with low levels. For example, adults with less than a high school education are more than twice as likely as those with a bachelor’s degree or more education to say they are not too happy with their lives (23% vs. 9%).²⁴ And those with low family incomes, of less than $30,000 annually, are three times as likely as those with family incomes of $75,000 or more to say they are not too happy (21% vs. 7%).

Those who are unemployed and looking for work are less happy with their lives, even when controlling for family income. Unemployed Americans who are looking for work and report a family income of less than $30,000 are about twice as likely as those who are employed and report the same family income to say they are not too happy with how things are going in their lives (26% compared with 14%).

Americans are divided over whether their jobs give them a sense of identity or just provide a living

In addition to job satisfaction, the survey explored what American workers’ jobs mean to them – are their jobs central to who they are, or are they mainly just a source of income? About half (51%) of employed Americans say they get a sense of identity from their job, while the other half (47%) say their job is just what they do for a living.²⁵ And about half (51%) of all U.S. workers say they view their job as a career, while 18% see it as a steppingstone to a career and 30% say it’s just a job to get them by.

The same factors that underlie job satisfaction are linked to deeper attitudes about work. Workers with a postgraduate degree are the most likely to say their job gives them a sense of identity (77%), while 60% with a bachelor’s degree, 48% of those with some college education and about four-in-ten (38%) of those with a high school diploma or less say the same. Similarly, employed adults with a bachelor’s degree or more education are nearly twice as likely as those with less education to say their job is a career (70%, compared with 44% of those with some college experience and 39% of those with no college education).

Those at the top of the income scale are the most likely to see their job as part of their identity and as a career. Some 60% of those with an annual family income of $75,000 or more say they get a sense of identity from their job, compared with 37% of those with a family income of less than $30,000. And 75% of employed adults in the top income category ($75,000 or more) see their job as a career, compared with 49% of those in the middle ($30,000 to $74,999) and only 17% of those in the lowest income category (less than $30,000).

Roughly six-in-ten or more of those who are self-employed (63%) or who work for a nonprofit organization (65%) or the government (67%) say they get a sense of identity from their job, while only 42% of those who work for a private company say the same. Salaried and full-time employees are also more likely to say their job gives them a sense of identity than hourly and part-time employees, respectively.

At the same time, half or more of Americans who are self-employed (63%) or who work for a nonprofit organization (56%) or the government (66%) see their job as a career, while 44% of those who work for a private company say the same.

There are also some significant differences by industry. For example, 62% of adults working in the health care industry and 70% of those working in education say they get a sense of identity from their job, compared with 42% of people working in hospitality and 36% in retail or wholesale trade. And 66% of those working in a STEM profession or teaching say their job gives them a sense of identity, while 43% of those working in manual/physical occupations and 37% of those working in retail or service jobs say the same. ²⁶ Employees of the same industries and occupations that are most likely to report that their job provides them with a sense of identity (health care, education and STEM/teaching) are more likely than others to say their jobs are careers.

Job characteristics are also linked to these attitudes about work. A quarter of part-time employees see their job as a career, while 22% consider it a steppingstone and 52% say it’s just a job to get them by. But among full-time workers, 58% view their job as a career, 17% say it’s a steppingstone to a career and 24% say it’s just a job to get them by.

Younger workers are significantly less likely than middle-aged and older workers to view their job as a career (26% of those ages 18 to 29) and more likely to describe it is a steppingstone to a career (41%). If this age group follows the path of older adults, many of those “steppingstone” jobs will indeed lead to careers.

Among young adults, though, there is a sharp divide by education. Those with at least a bachelor’s degree are about twice as likely as those with less education to say their job is a career (41%, compared with 21% of those with some college experience and 22% of those with a high school diploma or less). These groups with lower education are more likely to say their job is just to get them by.

The share of U.S. workers saying their job gives them a sense of identity has dropped somewhat since the question was first asked by Gallup in 1989. Then, 57% of employed adults said their job gave them a sense of identity, compared with 51% today.

Most Americans overall feel their jobs are secure

Americans’ confidence in their job security remains high after reaching a low in the early 1980s. Today, 60% of employed Americans say it is not at all likely that they will lose their job or be laid off in the next 12 months. An additional 28% say it is not too likely, 7% say it is fairly likely and 5% say it is very likely.

Even so, a segment of the U. S. workforce expresses a high level of vulnerability. Among workers with less than a high school diploma, about four-in-ten (39%) say it’s very or fairly likely they may be laid off within 12 months. By comparison, only 11% of those with a high school diploma, 10% of those with some college education and 7% of those with at least a bachelor’s degree say the same.

Similarly, those in the lowest family income bracket of less than $30,000 annually are four times as likely as those with family incomes of at least $75,000 and three times as likely as those with incomes between $30,000 and $74,999 to say they’re very or fairly likely to lose their job in the next year (24% vs. 6% and 8%, respectively).

Certain types of workers are more likely to feel their jobs are insecure. For example, 23% of temporary workers say they are very or fairly likely to lose their job in the next 12 months, compared with 8% of those who describe their jobs as permanent positions.

People who work in manual or physical occupations such as maintenance workers, farmers and construction workers are more likely than those in other popular occupations to say they may be laid off in the next year (for example, 16% of these workers say they’re very or fairly likely to lose their job, compared with 8% of those working in management). Those who work in small companies of less than 50 employees (16%) are more likely than those working in larger workplaces to say they are very or fairly likely to lose their job.

While relatively few workers say it’s likely that they will lose their job in the next 12 months, a sizable minority (37%) of those who are not self-employed say it would be possible for their employer to outsource their job to a worker outside of the U.S. This is up somewhat from 2006, when 31% believed this would be possible.

Those without a college degree and those with low family incomes are more likely to say their jobs could be outsourced. About four-in-ten workers with a high school education or less (39%) or with some college experience (40%) say this, compared with 32% of those with at least a bachelor’s degree. Workers with a low level of family income (less than $30,000) are more likely than those with family incomes of $75,000 or more to say it would be possible for their employer to replace them by hiring someone outside of the country (41% vs. 33%).

Relatively few U.S. workers believe that their jobs could be replaced with technology. Some 15% of workers who are not self-employed say their employer could use technology to replace the job they are currently doing; 85% say this wouldn’t be possible.

This is in line with previous research that found that, while 65% of adults predict that robots and computers will do much of the work currently done by humans within 50 years, 80% of workers expect that their own jobs will still exist in their current forms in the same time period.

Workers with a high school diploma or less education are more likely than those with higher levels of education to say it is possible that their jobs could be replaced with technology (20%, compared with 13% of those with some college experience and 11% of those with at least a bachelor’s degree). And those with a family income of less than $30,000 annually are more likely than those with an income of $75,000 or greater (23% vs. 9%) to say their job could potentially be replaced.

Though workers who are paid by the hour (19%) are more likely than salaried employees (9%) to say their jobs could be replaced by technology, there are no statistically significant differences between full- and part-time workers.

People who work in management professions (5%) are less likely than those in other popular occupations to say it’s possible that their job could be replaced by technology.

Full-time workers much more likely than part-timers to have job benefits

According to the Pew Research survey, a majority of workers report that they have access to health insurance (68%), paid sick leave or vacation (67%) and a 401(k) or other retirement program (59%) through their employer. Census data show that the share of workers with employer-provided health insurance and access to employer-sponsored retirement plans have fallen in recent decades. (See Chapter 1 for more details.)

Across the board, these benefits are more common among workers with at least a bachelor’s degree, but around half or more of workers with less education still report access to these employer-provided benefits. The youngest and oldest segments of the workforce – those who are 18 to 29 or 65 and older – are less likely to be offered each benefit.

Full-time workers are at least twice as likely as part-time workers to say that their employer offers each of these benefits to them. For example, 69% of full-time employees can access a 401(k) or other retirement program through their employer, compared with only 26% of part-time workers.

In general, those who work for the government (including federal, state and local) are the most likely to say they have access to these benefits (for example, 87% say they have access to health insurance). Private company and nonprofit employees are somewhat less likely to say their employer offers health insurance coverage (74% and 72%, respectively) and self-employed workers report a much lower rate (25%).

About four-in-ten (41%) American workers also say their employer provides tuition reimbursement for skills training or additional education. While those who are highly educated, those with high incomes, and full-time and government workers are more likely to have access to tuition reimbursement than their counterparts, 18- to 29-year-olds are just as likely to say they are offered this benefit as middle-aged workers.

These estimates of workers’ access to employer-provided benefits are similar to those found by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Majority of full-time and part-time workers are satisfied with their work schedules

Full-time and part-time workers were asked about their work schedule preferences. Full-time workers were asked if they would prefer to be working part time, and part-time workers were asked if they would prefer full-time work. For the most part, both groups are satisfied with their current schedules.

About a third of part-time workers (36%) say they would prefer to be working full time, while 64% say they would not. Men who work part time are more likely than women to say they would prefer to work full time (41% vs. 31%). Similarly, part-time working parents of children under the age of 18 living in their household are more likely than non-parents to say they would prefer to work full time (44% vs. 32%).

Among part-time workers, those with family incomes of less than $30,000 (51%) are more likely than those with higher incomes to say they would prefer to be working full time, with about half falling into this underemployed group. By contrast, 36% of part-time workers with a family income between $30,000 to $74,999 and an even smaller share (14%) among those with a family income of $75,000 or more say they would prefer a full-time job.

Most full-time workers report that they prefer that schedule (80%, compared with 20% who say they would rather work part time). There are relatively few demographic differences in this group. Women who work full time are more likely than men to say they would rather work part time (25% vs. 16%), but parents with children under the age 18 living in their household are just as likely as non-parents to say they prefer their full-time work. While those with lower family incomes are somewhat more likely to prefer part-time work than those with high incomes, there are few differences by education.

One-in-five adults who are not currently working say they are actively looking for a job. Men (23%) are more likely than women (18%) to fall into this category. And the youngest Americans are much more likely than the oldest segment of the population to be job hunting. About half (49%) of 18- to 29-year-old adults who are not employed say they’re looking for work, compared with 38% of those ages 30 to 49, 17% of those ages 50 to 64, and only 2% of those ages 65 and older. Adults who are not employed and have at least a bachelor’s degree (13%) are less likely than those with less education to be looking for work.

Work that makes us happier

Career and self-realization

The idea that work should bring joy is relatively new. For much of human history—indeed, ever since Adam and Eve were expelled from paradise and doomed to earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brows—work has been perceived at best as an inevitable duty, at worst as a curse. And today, most people on the planet are happy if they just manage to find a job, while thinking more about money and stability than about happiness.

However, this is not a reason to put up with routine, boredom and stress at work, putting an end to your desire to enjoy it. To strive to make your work an important and meaningful part of life is a natural desire of modern man. And in order to achieve this, it takes relatively little: to recognize that the work we do today has many virtues and is not inferior to other occupations. There are no uninteresting professions in the world, and the joy that we can receive from our own depends primarily on ourselves.

The myth of calling

Things don’t work out, the boss is dissatisfied, and colleagues, on the contrary, radiate energy and enthusiasm. If this situation drags on, it is difficult to resist the thought: “Probably, I made a mistake with the choice of specialty.”

In fact, when choosing a future profession, we often focus not so much on our true desires, but on the ideas of our parents, the current situation on the labor market, and other circumstances. But even if the chosen occupation does not correspond to our aspirations, this is not a drama at all: today it is not only impossible, but not necessary, to determine the type of one’s activity once and for all.

“Some spend their whole lives clarifying the meaning of the concept of “vocation,” says Russian representative of the International Coaching Federation (ICF) Svetlana Chumakova, “and from time to time they ask themselves: “I have achieved a certain goal, but what does this mean for me and what am I going to do next?”

The desire to change the field of activity seems strange to many: we regret the time and effort spent on education and mastering basic labor skills, and we are afraid of losing what we have already achieved in the professional field. At the same time, the science fiction writer Ivan Efremov predicted that a person of the future would master at least three professions in his life – and today there is less and less incredible in this statement.

“We still have a lot of epic thinking,” says coach and business consultant Leonid Krol. – Learned – go to work, and then you will be sent to a well-deserved rest. And we do not dare to make our life from the epic a collection of stories.

A person can have one calling at 25 and another at 35. You have to try yourself in different things, and not necessarily at the cost of five years of education. In life, there should be many short trips, hobbies, you need to try new images and study yourself in different ways.

Think about yourself

To avoid dependence on work and feel like not only an employee, but also a person, you should ask yourself the question several times a day: “What do I really want now?” “Often we find ourselves “assigned” to our work and forget who we really are,” comments Leonid Krol. “At the same time, a person who knows what he wants at the moment goes to another level: he himself formulates questions and answers them, becoming his own master.”

The second way to constantly keep in touch with your inner world is to include in the surrounding space things that are not related to work. It can be photos of loved ones on the desktop or a favorite book hidden in one of his drawers – something that will allow you to forget about professional problems for a while.

“The world is trying to conquer a person,” says Leonid Krol, “and in this way we seem to put ourselves and our dream above the sea of ​​problems raging around.”

Understand your needs…

What if we are not yet ready to look for a new occupation? You can successfully look for the “other self” in the existing job – for this you need to figure out what we still like about it. Let’s try to figure out our own parameters of good work and separate them from those that were cultivated in our family.

“My grandfather went to work at eight in the morning all his life,” says 23-year-old Olga. – And when I found an excellent home-based job, my grandmother and mother could not come to terms with this for a long time. They were sure: if I don’t go to work on the first trolleybus, this is a bad job.”

To understand what you personally mean by “good work”, list its features. Do you want to help others or seek recognition? Have a free schedule or a car with a driver? This list will also let you know about your unmet needs: for status, respect for others, or a sense of freedom.

“Dream” a job for yourself, advises Leonid Krol. – Think carefully about all the details: a large or small team, what the boss looks like, where the workplace is located, what instructions are given. First, an ideal job is described in this way, then a good one, and finally an acceptable one. And if at first you wanted your boss to know eight languages, then by the end, you might agree to just a polite person. By drawing these mental pictures, you help yourself accept reality.”

…and accept rejection

When work meets our basic needs and expectations, we feel comfortable. And if this does not happen, we inevitably experience frustration and stress.

“When I got a job, I was told that I could stay at home two days a week,” complains 26-year-old Lina. “But I have to work a full week. My presence in the office is necessary, but I still feel very hurt.”

Reality rarely meets all our desires: freedom is poorly compatible with stability, and power is incompatible with the possibility of direct and easy communication with others. To avoid disappointment, we need to calmly part with some part of our desires.

“Choosing one thing, we invariably refuse another,” says Svetlana Chumakova. “But rejection won’t hurt if we realize that the choice is our own.”

Determine what is unacceptable

Finding out what exactly is absolutely unacceptable for you in the professional sphere is no less important than determining your own expectations and wishes. As you draw an image of your ideal job, identify what you are not going to tolerate.

“Each person can set their own limit of patience and further build their behavior, referring to it,” says Svetlana Chumakova. — For example, a day he is able to withstand one big scandal with his superiors or three small ones with colleagues of equal status, but no more. And, if the level of stress at his job exceeds what he agrees to, it’s time to take action.

There is a time for everything

Anyone who brings work home or before going to bed without fail “loses” work situations in his head, risks his health: an excessive dose of business worries is fraught with deep depression. This conclusion was made by psychologist Sabina Sonnentag from the University of Konstanz (Germany), who studied the behavior of 87 representatives of various professions.

Those of the respondents who worked longer than others and experienced heavy loads could not forget about work in the evening, and as a result, they felt tired and were constantly in a bad mood. The psychologist warns: “He who is constantly busy with work may suddenly find himself incapable of doing it at all.”

Get away from stress…

What to do if the stress level at work becomes unbearable? There are only three options: reconcile (to the detriment of yourself), leave or try to turn the tide. If you have chosen the third way, begin to act before overwork deprives you of strength.

“You have to learn to be aware of your emotions and deal with them,” advises Svetlana Chumakova. You can meet with your superiors and discuss the current situation. You and your manager need to understand what each of you expects from the other, and then discuss what you can give to the organization and what you cannot do.

However, stress is not always unambiguously harmful: in a competitive environment, it can serve as an additional incentive for development.

“Ask yourself: what gives me stress? – offers Svetlana Chumakova. Does he destroy me or fuels my interest in what is happening? And if it is a natural part of my work, what ways can I choose to respond to it?

…And from boredom

Boredom occurs not only when we have nothing to do. This feeling is due to a lack of motivation, and there can be several reasons for this: the routine nature of the work, a priori lack of interest in it, or lack of respect for the organization in which we work.

But we still have the opportunity to be more enthusiastic about what we do. The main thing is to say goodbye to the myth that we could find something more interesting and suitable for us elsewhere: what makes work exciting is our perception. Suffice it to recall the janitor from the notebooks of Sergei Dovlatov, who, looking at the garbage, figured out what apartment he was from, thereby proving that there is a place for creativity in any business.

“A financial manager in his fantasies can see himself as a jazz musician, but at the same time understand that he needs to provide for his family,” says Svetlana Chumakova. “Therefore, he needs to understand what value the existing work represents for him now, how it can be connected with his dream, and on the basis of this, find new, unexpected angles in his occupation. ”

In order to overcome boredom, we must try to creatively approach the task entrusted to us: for example, to invent another – faster, more efficient, or even just more aesthetic – way to do it. Having overcome our own inertia, we will have the moral right to challenge our superiors: “Give me the opportunity to show what I am capable of, or try myself in something else.”

Dare to leave

Sometimes we have to take a decisive step: we do not see benefits in our work, no improvements are foreseen, which means that we have only one thing left – to leave. This decision can cause fear: what if the right job is no longer available to me? What if I overestimated my abilities and have to pay for self-confidence? However, this line of thought is not the only one possible.

“Why not consider your departure as a way out to another level? Leonid Krol suggests. – At some point, you need to understand: who is more – me or my work? If a person considers himself greater than his work, he is not afraid of losing it.

Leaving your old job involves looking for a new one, so it’s worth remembering what makes us attractive in the eyes of a potential employer. We can understand this more clearly by asking ourselves: how valuable am I to the organization I’m going to work for? What are my strengths and weaknesses? What are my growth prospects? The answers to these questions at the right time will remind us that our abilities and vitality will allow us to maintain mobility in the labor market.

“People who know what they want and know how to present themselves correctly are more likely to find a job to their liking,” says Leonid Krol. Finally, consciously parting with an unsuitable place for himself, a person receives an incredible sense of freedom and inner renewal as a reward. After all, professional life – like life in general – never stands still.

Women start… and win

To successfully realize oneself in work, a person needs to possess certain qualities. Social psychologist Takhir Bazarov is convinced that they are more characteristic of women.

Psychologies: What qualities help us succeed at work?

IQ ceases to be the main indicator of the efficiency of a specialist. Its place is taken by EQ – the coefficient of emotionality associated with imagery of thinking and flexibility of behavior – qualities that are more inherent in women.

A typical example: men rarely allow themselves to communicate with subordinates in a friendly way, while women leaders understand that it is possible and necessary to help each other regardless of the difference in official position – it is this strategy that ensures the greatest efficiency of the team today.

There is another difference: a man is more likely to encourage an employee who has the necessary skills, while a woman will be interested in a person with “burning eyes”, who is highly motivated – and, as practice shows, this is a more successful position for modern business.

Are women becoming more and more serious competitors for men?

In one of my trainings for top managers, there is this exercise: on a large sheet of paper we write down 40-50 reasons that make people behave in a certain way in life, and each participant chooses the ones that are closest to him. Now in the top five motives women have a career and money, while men have love, family and a dream.

Successful men have worked too hard for the past 15 years and have developed a need for peace. In addition, women in business feel freer than men: formal status is not so important for them. Moreover, if a woman does not have a career, she will take care of the house, and few people will condemn her for this, and this is not accepted among men.

Text: Zhanna Sergeeva, Yulia Mengo Photo Source: Getty Images

New on the site

How rest and exercise affect your career: proven ways to work more efficiently and productively

“I choose men who are disappointed in girls to show them true love”

“See a guy every one or two months: career is more important for him than relationships”

“Once in a lifetime”: how to choose a spouse and guarantee happiness – the opinion of a psychologist

A normal man of the 21st century: what is he like? 7 key ideas

Test: Who do you think about more – about yourself or others?

“The future son-in-law is behaving strangely. What should I do if we work together?”

Tim O’Reilly. Work that Matters: First Principles / Habr

Work on Stuff that Matters: First Principles

posted January 11, 2009

I’ve spent a lot of time in the past year encouraging people to do work that matters. This raised a lot of questions about what kind of work it could be. I did not really want to answer these questions, because for each person there will be a different answer. I thought it would be a good idea to start the new year by laying down a few principles to help you think about this issue for yourself.

But first of all, I want to be clear that “work that matters” doesn’t just mean non-profit projects, charity, or any other form of “good deeds”. Non-commercial projects are often a good thing, and people with technical ability can make important contributions, but it’s important to get beyond that. I am absolutely convinced of the social value of business done right. We need to create an economic system in which socially significant projects are automatically and guaranteed to be rewarded, and not based on charities funded by the kindness of the heart.

I have several “litmus tests”, intuitive tests that I constantly apply in my life on a subconscious level. I will try to formulate them and I hope that you will help me with your comments.

1. Work on what is more important to you than money.
I touched on this issue when I gave a speech to SIMS students a couple of years ago, I think I can just quote myself from that speech.

Some of you may find a job with a prestigious company. Some may succeed, while others may fail. I want to remind you that financial success is not the only goal or the only measure of success. It’s easy to get caught up in the reckless hustle and bustle of making money. But you must see money as fuel for what you really want to do, not as an end in itself. Money is like gasoline in a car, you have to keep an eye on it or you will end up on the sidelines, but a normal life is not a trip to gas stations!

Whatever you do, think about your true values. If you’re an entrepreneur, taking the time to think like this will help you build a better company. If you’re going to work for someone else, thinking like this will help you find the right firm or organization to work with, and when you do, you’ll be able to do your job better.

Don’t be afraid to think big. Business author Jim Collins says good companies always have big, dangerous, and audacious goals. Google’s motto “access to all the information in the world” is an example of such a goal. I like to think that my company’s mission to “change the world by spreading the knowledge of innovators” is also such a goal.

Don’t be afraid to fail. Rilke has a wonderful poem in which the biblical Jacob fights with an angel, fails, but becomes stronger from this battle. It ends like this:

He will not look for victories.
He is waiting for the highest beginning
He was increasingly defeated in order to grow in response to him.

One test for the bubble is how many entrepreneurs are fixated on their future earnings rather than the big goals they hope to achieve. Clone products are almost always focused on monetary goals. Entrepreneurs who first enter the market usually expect easy success much less, and struggle, like Jacob with an angel, with a difficult problem that they expect to solve or even slightly split.

It’s also obvious that if you’re more concerned with competition than with users and the value you’re going to create for them, then you’re on the wrong track. As Cathy Sierra once remarked, “In many cases, the more you try to compete, the less competitive you actually become.”

The most successful companies perceive success as a by-product on the way to achieving their main goal, which is always bigger and more important than their own project.

2. Do more good than you get.
It’s pretty easy to see that Bernie Madoff didn’t follow this rule, nor did the other Wall Street titans who went so far as to hand out billions in bonuses to themselves, destroying our economy along the way. It is difficult to assess small businesses from this perspective, but it is pretty clear that most companies actually benefit their community and their customers as well as themselves, and the most successful companies create a self-revolving cycle of mutually beneficial exchange of value with their customers in order to do this.

For example, a bank lends to small businesses, sees their success, perhaps lends them more money, builds business, hires new employees, takes more deposits, and helps more entrepreneurs. The energy of this cycle has the power to lift people out of poverty, as is well seen in microfinance institutions such as Grameen Bank. This bank is clearly focused on delivering more value than it receives, unlike Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Washington Mutual, or many other bankrupt financial institutions involved in the current financial crash. They may have started with the right principles, but at some point they clearly became more concerned with their own benefit.

If you follow this principle, you may suddenly find that others have made more money from your ideas than you have. This is fine. I’ve seen more than one billionaire (and countless startups trying to replicate their path) admit that their business started with a few O’Reilly books. I’ve had business people who said they found an idea for a business in something I said or wrote. This is good! I remember back in the early days of the internet, after my speech at the Borders store, one customer said, “You know, you just gave your competitors a year-ahead publishing program.” If my goal is to “change the world by spreading the knowledge of innovators”, then I am simply delighted that my competitors help me in this mission!

Look around. How many people have you placed in good jobs? How many customers use your products to make a living? How many competitors have you spawned? How many people have you helped without getting anything in return?

Les Misérables has a wonderful passage about the benefits that Jean Valjean brought as a businessman (working under the pseudonym Uncle Madeleine). Thanks to the success of his industry, he made his entire region prosperous, so that “there was not one of the most dilapidated pockets where at least a little money would not start; there was no such poor dwelling where at least a little joy did not appear. And key point:

He himself grew rich, but, strange as it may seem for a simple businessman, he apparently did not consider profit his main concern. He seemed to think more of others than of himself.

Focusing on big goals, not making money, and doing more good than you get yourself are closely related principles. The first is a test for those who start something new, and the second is a more difficult test that you must pass in order to create something viable.

Take Microsoft. They started with a big goal: “a computer on every desk and in every home” and over the years has consistently delivered more value than they themselves received. They helped birth the entire PC industry; they have built a platform for many small software vendors to thrive. But over time, they began to take more value than they give away: when the cost of PCs fell, iron makers had to survive on tiny margins, while Microsoft collected monopoly super-profits. Bit by bit, Microsoft has swallowed up its own developer ecosystem, embedding successful startups into its own products, and using its operating system to ruin innovators. As I’ve written all over the place, I’m convinced that Microsoft needs to shift to big targets beyond its own profitability, and deliver more value than it gets if it wants to succeed (just last week, Danny Sullivan wrote a great article on the strategic advantage of this idea) .

Or take Google. Again, a gigantic goal: “to organize all the information of the world.” And like Microsoft in the early days, they let others prosper at their own expense, and make a lot of money themselves. Any company that has a presence on the internet can simply look at their logs to see who is doing the most good for whom. How much traffic are you getting from Google? But again, as I wrote, this test is still looming in the future of Google. Will they continue to provide more value than they receive, or will they start looking for more profit for themselves?

It’s a matter of balance. Every business must follow the minimum level of profitability, every person must take care of a roof over his head and provide a livelihood for his loved ones. But take a closer look: how much do you think about yourself and what you can get, compared to thinking about how much you can benefit others?

It’s hard to keep your focus on big tasks in the face of an economic downturn, because the main task is to save money. I remember some of the decisions I made after the dot-com crash in 2001, when I started to care much more about the survival of my business than about creating value for society. We published a few clone books that I really regret; and things that had nothing to do with keeping the business afloat became the foundation of our future.

But the above two tests are not enough, for it becomes clear that we also need a long-term ecological perspective. So I would add a third principle.

3. Take the long sight.
Brian Eno talks about a wonderful incident in his life, after which he got the idea to create The Long Now Foundation (Organization of the Long Now).

In 1978 I was in New York. A wealthy friend invited me to a housewarming party, but as the taxi driver drove me through the increasingly dirty and broken streets, I began to worry if I had given him the right address. Finally he stopped at the door of a gloomy, inhospitable industrial building. On the steps lay in oblivion two rumpled vagabonds. No more signs of life on the entire street.

– I think you made a mistake – I timidly turned to the taxi driver.

But he was not mistaken. My friend’s voice said, “Top floor!” when I rang the doorbell, and I thought, knowing her sense of humor, that this was some kind of prank. I was ready to laugh when I climbed up. The elevator creaked and moved slowly. I left it and ended up in a multi-million dollar palace. It is impossible to describe the contrast with the rest of the building and with the street.

I just couldn’t understand. Why did someone decide to spend a lot of money and build such a palace in such a dead place? Later I asked the hostess: “Do you like living here?” and she replied that this is the best place she has ever lived.