In Barry Schwartz New York Times article “Rethinking Work” the purpose behind his article is to questions the effectiveness of the work structure and shows that drive, motivation and purpose are equally important to compensation for a job completed. He explains how people go into a career or the job market with goals and intentions of helping others or doing good. However, those goals do no align with the company, and the workers goals fall away. The context of the article stems from a Gallup poll the author read. The results of the poll, conducted among workers, showed “63% were not engaged” (Crabtree) and ''24% are actively disengaged”(Crabtree) from their jobs. With the vast majority of the workers feeling this way. The author is persuasive and argumentative as he is advocating for a change in workplace protocol, and provides examples to back up his reasoning. Even with an argumentative style, his tone is not. He is more informative and optimistic. He comes off as wanting things to change, and outlines how it has worked for others. …show more content…
Schwartz goes on to explain how the industry arrived at its current structure and the driving force behind it. He then provides actionable measures organizations can take to improve the overall quality of life and work for employees. He presents his opinion and anecdotal information, and backs it up with studies. The study conducted by Professor Amy Wrzesniewski on hospital custodians, is one of several studies she has conducted. “Her research explores how people make meaning of their work, with a focus on the impact meaning has on employees and the organizations in which they work.” (Center for Positive Organizations). This provides validity to Schwartz argument, and shows his cause is one that can be