Charity or Profit?

The following appeared in a memorandum from the head of a human resources department at a major automobile

manufacturing company to the company's managers:

"Studies have found that employees of not-for-profit organizations and charities are often more highly motivated than employees of for-profit corporations to perform well at work when their performance is not being monitored or evaluated. Interviews with employees of not-for-profit organizations suggest that the reason for their greater motivation is the belief that their work helps to improve society. Because they believe in the importance of their work, they have personal reasons to perform well, even when no financial reward is present. Thus, if our corporation began donating a significant portion of its profits to humanitarian causes, our employees’ motivation and productivity would increase substantially and our overall profits would increase as well."

Discuss how well reasoned . . .etc.

The presented argument asserts that if the company in question starts donating a significant part of its profits to humanitarian causes, it would substantially increase the productivity and motivation of the employees. To support this conclusion the argument presents a study about the employees of not-for-profit organizations and charities. The argument is flawed on several counts.

Firstly, the employees of charities and not-for-profit organizations are self-motivated. The reason that they are working for such organization is that they want to contribute to the society. On the other hand people working in for-profit organizations may not be motivated by the same thing. If they were, they would have been working for some charity. Hence the reasoning that the employees of a for-profit organization will be motivated by the company's contribution to humanitarian causes is faulty at best. It can be justified only if the argument also mentions that the employees of the current company also feel the same way.

Secondly, the argument assumes that there is no better way to motivate the employees. Employees can also be motivated by a good work environment, bigger salaries and quality work. The productivity can also be increased by streamlining processes, providing employees better tools and having flexible timings. Even though contributing to a noble cause is a good thing, the company may be better off focusing on alternate strategies if the final aim is to motivate people. There is nothing concrete to compare the results against. If the argument presents some alternative ways and shows the current way to be much superior in terms of cost and effectiveness, one may accept the argument.

Lastly, the reason to commit a significant portion of profits is unclear. Any company,  for-profit or not-for-profit, is accountable to its shareholders. Any action directly affecting profits needs to be justified by quantifiable metrics. Hence the argument would gain weight if it presents the expected return on investment as a result of implementing the stated policy and the basis of such a prediction.

Concluding, the argument on its own is weak and not convincing. Nevertheless if the writer supplies additional information, the argument can become reasonably strong. Since the motivating factors for people working in profit and not-for-profit may not be same, the need for additional information is especially strong.