Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: sweat equity

[William Johnson (0005638134]

In response to David Thomasson's suggestion to credit sweat equity in terms
of completed work rather than hours worked, Pablo Halpern wrote:
>
> This works fine for professional contracts, but sounds horrible to me in 
> this context. What you are really saying is that desk-workers who have to 
> learn all new skills will get less credit for their effort than people who 
> already have those skills.

Does it sound right to reward the less productive at the same rate as the more
productive when those who _are_ more productive are more productive because of
their personal investments of time and effort?  No.  To do so discourages those
with skills from participating.

The individual who, in doing work for the group, is required to learn something
new is the sole beneficiary of that new knowledge.  Only the application of 
that 
knowlege to group objectives is really a group benefit.

Pablo continued:
> How about trusting people ... and just counting hours. Do you really believe 
> that there will be wholesale advantage-taking by people...

Trust obviously _enhances_ social and business arrangements.  But that seems 
the less important point.  IMHO, it is unwise to structure a system that
_only_ works when people deny themselves personal advantage for the common good.
That may work for a while, but it's doomed to collapse in the first "ill wind".
I don't mean to start a big "communism" debate, and I do appreciate the critical
_need_ for "good will", but I also think that reliance on trust should be
held to a minimum.  You may otherwise find the collective trust depleted in 
some context where nothing else will do.


William Johnson
5638134 [at] mcimail.com