Our "lucky to have a job" fallacy has had its day

Studies show work overload combined with job insecurity undermines morale, writes Bill Hobbs

The damage wrought by the violation of two fundamental motivating precepts: our need for security and desire for justice may trigger a national malaise that, unless understood, could undermine economic recovery for years.

Called survivor syndrome, this malaise causes low levels of morale and motivation in those whose jobs are not eliminated. It’s a silent problem as should people raise genuine concerns, they are ignored and told “you are lucky to have a job”.

“Lucky to have a job” frames a problem that unless understood and dealt with will undermine morale, motivation and productivity in many private and public sector organisations. With tens of thousands of jobs already eliminated and more to come, four years of austerity budgets will have profound implications for employers and employees.

First spotted over twenty years ago, survivor syndrome takes organisations and their staff years to recover from. It’s a sickness that effects whole organisations after jobs are eliminated. The majority of Irish political and business leadership will probably knowingly or naively ignore its implications. Yet in an economy with so many of its business and service organisations having to shed jobs, its effects are only barely understood.


Soft language such as downsizing, restructuring and voluntary parting, glosses over the brutality of deliberate decisions to eliminate jobs. The effects on employees who do not lose their jobs, have been studied and documented since the 80’s when the illusionary benefits of a job elimination growth strategy called downsizing, were first exposed.

For years companies have practiced downsizing or re-engineering trying to increase profitability, mainly by trying to do more with fewer people. Countless studies have shown this is an illusion, as most companies do not achieve the savings or productivity planned for. Called the Productivity Paradox, it happens when organisational leadership ignores the welfare of people they continue to employ. Such companies can become anorexic, too thin for their own good and in asking far too much, from far too few staff, they fail.

Organisational psychologists were quick put their finger on why. There are three actors involved in eliminating jobs; the person who enforces the decision, the executioner; the person fired, the victim; and the person left behind the survivor. People who get to keep their jobs react negatively and it can take up to six years to recover from its psychological effects.

These effects are similar to those experienced by people who have survived traumatic events. As job elimination violates two fundamental motivating precepts; our need for security and our desire for justice, people react. They feel guilty, angered, depressed, unsafe and insecure. Work overload combined with job insecurity undermines morale as people switch loyalty to their company for loyalty to their own personal interests.

As insecurity increases, people withdraw into a defensive mode. Unwilling to voice concerns, they live in a state of learned helplessness. It explains in part why battered spouses continue to live with their partners.

Bullying, harassment and intimidation thrives as poorly trained managers are exposed as ineffective leaders. When people complain they are silenced, told they should be grateful to have a job. It’s amplified when people cannot get a job elsewhere and are trapped within the job. Employee motivation and productivity plummets.

Unfortunately there are many public and private sector organisations whose policies and practices will provide fertile ground for survivor syndrome to take hold. Poor leadership and management of job eliminations will damage employee morale, undermine productivity and take years to recover from. How big the problem has or will become is not helped by public discourse on the challenges facing the country.

One of the mistaken assumptions, promoted by politicians, few if any have ever worked in, let alone managed large organisations, is for that greater productivity using fewer resources is possible across the public service.

Trying to be more effective and efficient with fewer people is unrealistic in theory and practice. Having a depressed workforce makes it impossible.

For the past three years, the Government has glossed over the severity of the economic recession and its wholes-scale job elimination.

Its narrative, full of optimistic rhetoric has been exposed and it has lost trust and credibility. We feel less secure and perceive the injustice wrought by a political systems’ promotion of a less than competent parochial mediocrity and cronyism. Our two fundamental motivating precepts; our need for security and desire for justice have been violated.

Do we risk a national survivor syndrome that could significantly negatively impact on economic recovery?

The good news is the syndrome is understood and can be alleviated by a leadership that demonstrates an appreciation of people welfare beyond telling them they are lucky to have a job.

A version of this article appeared in the Irish Examiner, Business Section, Monday 4th October 2010.