I was called too lazy as a kid so much that it figures largely in my debilitating disability. Then in the 90s studying psychology I developed a hypothesis there was no such thing as laziness (or the sin sloth as its recognized by post-Calvanist Protestantism) rather all instances of avolition could be traced to dysfunction, poor health or misunderstanding the degree of fatigue caused by the necessary work.
By the 2010s the psychology sector came to the same conclusion, that productivity could be improved by creating a healthy environment for work that allowed people to do human things between tasks (take bathroom breaks, check social media, eat snacks, etc.) Or can be decreased by making the work environment toxic (crunching, harassment, stale offerings in the vending machine, pressure to not take relief breaks, etc.)
The epidemic lockdown of 2020 and mass furlogh actually vindicated these hypotheses (though I haven’t read the studies) when people turned to hobbies with fervent obsession, often enough yielding marketable results, resulting in the great resignation.
I think one of the main reasons your theory isn’t commonplace is the variance in tolerance people have for vigilance. Some people have a lot less tolerance, and appear lazy. Other people have an extremely strong tolerance, and to them, everyone else appears lazy.
I have adhd. My ability to motivate myself to do necessary tasks is very limited. But external pressures can improve my productivity by giving me less choice in the matter. By comparison, too much freedom can reduce my productivity by normalizing a reduced workload, making me intolerant of a workload I was previously capable of.
Laziness does exist. It can be fostered. But that doesn’t mean you can’t get improved productivity from a healthier balance in your workplace. Just as pressure has a range where it goes from motivating people to crippling them with stress, so too do healthy adjustments to workflow go from rejuvenating to lethargic.
I was called too lazy as a kid so much that it figures largely in my debilitating disability. Then in the 90s studying psychology I developed a hypothesis there was no such thing as laziness (or the sin sloth as its recognized by post-Calvanist Protestantism) rather all instances of avolition could be traced to dysfunction, poor health or misunderstanding the degree of fatigue caused by the necessary work.
By the 2010s the psychology sector came to the same conclusion, that productivity could be improved by creating a healthy environment for work that allowed people to do human things between tasks (take bathroom breaks, check social media, eat snacks, etc.) Or can be decreased by making the work environment toxic (crunching, harassment, stale offerings in the vending machine, pressure to not take relief breaks, etc.)
The epidemic lockdown of 2020 and mass furlogh actually vindicated these hypotheses (though I haven’t read the studies) when people turned to hobbies with fervent obsession, often enough yielding marketable results, resulting in the great resignation.
I think one of the main reasons your theory isn’t commonplace is the variance in tolerance people have for vigilance. Some people have a lot less tolerance, and appear lazy. Other people have an extremely strong tolerance, and to them, everyone else appears lazy.
I have adhd. My ability to motivate myself to do necessary tasks is very limited. But external pressures can improve my productivity by giving me less choice in the matter. By comparison, too much freedom can reduce my productivity by normalizing a reduced workload, making me intolerant of a workload I was previously capable of.
Laziness does exist. It can be fostered. But that doesn’t mean you can’t get improved productivity from a healthier balance in your workplace. Just as pressure has a range where it goes from motivating people to crippling them with stress, so too do healthy adjustments to workflow go from rejuvenating to lethargic.
https://youtu.be/to_e1N4xovQ