By: Dr. Anum Shafique
Last quarter, a multinational tech giant proudly announced record-breaking productivity figures. Shareholders celebrated, stock prices spiked, and press releases painted a glowing picture of success. Yet, buried beneath the headlines, an internal HR survey revealed a troubling reality: burnout rates were soaring, job satisfaction was sinking, and many employees were quietly planning their exit.
The conference calls continued, the targets grew more ambitious, and the performance dashboards gleamed with “on-track” metrics. The machine kept humming. On the surface, all seemed well. But behind the curtain, the actors were running on empty.
This is the paradox of today’s corporate world. The mantra is simple: deliver, deliver, deliver. The “show” must go on, no matter what the cost — even if the human cost is invisible. The question is: does this relentless push actually lead to sustainable success, or does it quietly hollow out the very foundations of the organisation?
The obsession with constant motion isn’t new. It has inherited the legacy from the past, from the time industrial revolution in 1980s took place, in the name of “hustle culture”, the phenomenon of corporate success is measured in terms of these quantified indicators including speed, volume and output. You have got to get the output by hook or by crook. The advancements in the technology for instance transition from manual to digital especially have intensified the level of expectations from the employees without ever taking any break.
The mantra of getting work done has taken the shape of a dangerous equation that is motion equals progress whereas rest is equated to weakness. This belief only amplified with the passage of time and is not ended, expected to continue with further intensification and drives the culture of corporate decision making in the present time. This is the mindset which many organizations follow and therefore, reward responsiveness over reflection, and speed over substance.
Following are the five fault lines of modern work:
- When the focus shifts from quality to quantity on getting the work done irrespective of the fact that the quality has been assured or not, it hampers the strategic performance of any organization. It needs to be understood that shortcuts can never replace thoroughness and innovation.
- The mantra “work smart not hard” and “do more with less” are often confused with success. It must be noted that efficiency measures how fast you mover but effectiveness measures whether your direction is right or not. Too often efficiency takes over effectiveness as the results are quicker but do they matter, that is the question. We do not need to get into the rat race; we need to do what is needed. This approach is necessity for us.
- When an individual is under pressure, even the well intentioned ones may tend to compromise, cut corners and ignore warning signs. The dilemma between “Is it right” and “Can we deliver on time” becomes more obvious. Such ethical dilemmas quietly erode integrity.
- It should be understood that we are humans not machines. A machine will not complain of burnout. It will suck all the meaningfulness from the work. It will fade the spark, the humanness, individual put in their work. The work will continue but it will be just for the sake of work done, without any energy, creativity or pride. It is more than fatigue; it is disengagement by individuals performing their duties.
- Humans are tied up to their emotions. You cannot expect this from machines. When you treat people like machines, and work becomes only about output, the emotional investment disappears, the recognition for the hard work is not duly recognized. Tasks get done, but only without ownership or connection to a larger purpose. Once the organizational culture is accustomed to this, it loses its purpose.
In the present era, majority of the executives understand this vicious circle yet are unable to break its shackles. The expectations from the stakeholders, competitive markets, and global benchmarks, all have strongly contributed to strengthen this psyche. This mindset has results into the system that rewards visible results over the sustainable health.
Some companies experiment with solutions — four-day workweeks, flexible hours, “no-meeting” days — but these are often treated as perks rather than structural shifts. Meanwhile, the performance machine demands the same pace, expecting workers to recover while still running.
The show can go on — but should it, if the performers are collapsing backstage? A healthy corporate culture is not one that simply sustains output, but one that sustains people. It values ethics alongside efficiency, effectiveness alongside speed, and quality alongside quantity.
If leaders fail to act, they may discover too late that the applause they’re hearing is hollow — and when the curtain finally falls, no amount of quarterly gains will bring it back up.
The writer is a lecturer at the Institute of Management Sciences, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi. She can be reached at anum.shafique@uaar.edu.pk
