I'm going to be a little "contradictory zentil", even if I believe that we must explore new ways of living in society, just not to
"Empty the debate" by making big friendly slaps on the stomach by congratulation
)) ... or that it is adrift for "passionate" motivations or even less acceptable motivations ...
It should have done a little Human Resources (HR) to understand that it is not so "simple", which does not mean that what you say does not fall under the corner of common sense!
The vast majority of employees only work by what is known as
"The need for restraint". We are all at this stage, where we have already been there ... Even if our parents told us to get up to go to school ... etc! In the same vein .... What you say is true but is not necessarily applicable to everyone. Some non-exhaustive examples:
Motivation
... but I did not talk about salary motivation ?! ;)
Participation in decisions
... there are many people who are not at all interested in "taking part in decisions".
... among those who are not, there are some that work only by their own "need of restraint" .... starting with this spring that makes them get up in the morning ....
Profit-sharing
... most people are very carefree, "profit sharing" even if they would like it when you talk to them, go over their heads!
Cooperative / s and other legal status
These principles do not escape employees in companies. Although there are improvements, according to Herzberg, these are generally short-lived. It is a work to be constantly put back on the carpet ... as discussed the other time ...
Human capital
This is indeed the worst in our societies, but it is due to the above and the "theoretical model". There is no room for "others" from which contexts and situations that can lead to "sress" (suicide due to stress).
"Dynamic balance"
I do not know, I have not studied this question at all. But qmm, considering the above, everything would not work as well as you would expect and as fast. Look with the dictatorships, in Egypt it took 40ans ... and again ... they took advantage of the inertia created by Tunisia, which just showed that it was possible! And the case is not over ... People who lived under duress, even if it was difficult to tolerate, then claim also situations of "constraints", it reassures them is it's always better than d ' to be left to oneself! I know, it's terrible to hear that for some ... And yet if we think about it, it's like this! You just have to remember the fake "Game of Truth" or something ... that consisted of inflicting electric shocks in case of false answers ... until death follows! Fictitious game or the participants, would give death without the knowledge of their own free will ... Without knowing that it was "only" a sociological experiment of very bad taste.
So the dynamic equilibrium in the wrong hands ...
Value of "human capital" => should we give a "price" to human life and how?
We should ask what the ladies of the Bois de Boulogne think? ;-) without laughing, the commodification of humans is a delicate subject, which should not be taken lightly, there can be perverse effects!
Is this a good solution? Doesn't that risk rotting the human spirit much more around the commodification of certain "forced laborers" by attributing to them a sort of "fair price" !? Ok, that's better ... because today there is nothing ... and because the employer has to think twice before dismissing! But seen from the angle of constraint, this reverses the situation by giving a "means of constraint" to those who precisely "need this need of constraint" to take charge! So no, not a simple solution, but to think about. Because as it is, I don't feel it is applicable. Perhaps this is where we should think about a concept around "universal capital", to be paid into a kind of old-age insurance ... or something? Because it can also be a possibility of employees blackmailing their company ... and there it begins to reverse the "roles"! The question is to know what maturity it would take to manage this in a company!
Besides, I note the paradox of giving a pecuniary value to the life of a worker, whereas the goal would be to do without ... money: happy paradigm :-)
Electoral charism
One point!
Mebon, they are not necessarily all ripoux ... Even if sometimes their decisions elude us, precisely because we do not have the capacity to appreciate all the merits of their decision, if only for lack of training or by ignorance of all the statistical parameters ... (pb: fate of this body ^^)
Representatives facilitators-voters?
Why not? The Swiss army had found the solution by hiring specialists recruited on the basis of their professional skills in the various "weapons". The plan you suggest would work very well if we drew lots among people who already have a certain background (they would obviously not need to be part of the elites, nor would they have to stay in their post for several terms => except to be "re-elected" according to their know-how by officiating as "advisers" => which would impose solutions of "mixed promotions")
Not a small deal anyway ...