IndexAbstractIntroductionGenerosity as an attributeWhy has generosity not evolved into work compensation models?Return on investmentEmployee utilizationGenerosity as a business modelConclusionAbstractThe goal of this article is to explore the relationship between generosity and corporate and work compensation models, with a rationale, to elaborate how current system designs and measurement matrices respond to the intrinsic values ​​of generosity and philanthropy. It is divided into three parts. In the first part, generosity is examined in terms of personal attributes. In the second part, generosity is analyzed as a model of remuneration for work. Finally, in the third part, the use of generosity as a business model is examined. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Keywords: generosity, return on investment, employee utilization, business projects IntroductionThis literature review represents an overview of the literature on generosity and its relationship to business models and workers' compensation models. It is divided into three parts. In the first part, generosity is examined in terms of personal attributes. The second part examines the use of generosity as a business model. Finally, in the third part, generosity is analyzed as a model of remuneration for work. Generosity as an Attribute When it comes to defining generosity in action, generosity often encompasses a very broad spectrum of human behaviors. Research has correlated generosity with altruism, philanthropy, kindness, social reciprocity style, well-being and even with the field of biology in which hormones that promote generosity are studied. Khema (1987) highlighted that generosity goes beyond the material attribution that is often attributed to it. He emphasized that the act of giving one's time, attention, concern, care and sharing one's skills and abilities also falls under generosity. Therefore, a person's motive to help others with everything they have that the other person lacks seems to be considered an act of generosity. A student teaching another student during exams to help him can be considered a generous outlook on life. An employer calling the employee during a difficult time or family crisis to check if everything is okay will be considered a generous act. A software developer who makes his software open source so that others can benefit from it will be seen as a philanthropic activity, an activity of giving without expecting anything in return. Khera (2014) suggested generosity in action as a means of developing self-esteem. He stressed: “If you want to quickly build positive self-esteem, one of the fastest ways is to do something for those who cannot repay you in cash or in kind.” Grant (2013) summarized research on the styles of reciprocity that people use in social interaction. He stated that there are 3 styles of reciprocity, namely “taking, giving and matching”. If one is a taker, help others strategically when the benefits to oneself outweigh the personal cost. On the other hand, if you are a giver, you help others when the benefits to others outweigh the personal cost. Finally, a matcher is one who helps others when the benefits for both are fair. Therefore, generosity is seen as a very broad field of human activities and interactions. The effects of this behavior are also examined in great detail in various research. The most significant of these is therelationship between generosity and success. Research by Grant (2013) has shown that givers tend to be more successful than recipients in various industries. According to (Bob Burg, 2007), “Most people laugh when they hear that the secret to success is giving… On the other hand, most people are nowhere near as successful as they would like.” He demonstrated 5 principles of success based on the philosophy of giving. “Pay it Forward” and “Gift Economy” are some of the concepts of economic transactions based on the theme of generosity that are gaining great momentum today. Web communities such as https://www.servicespace.org and http://www.movedbylove.org/ show numerous examples of these modes of economic activity in action. (Mehta, 2015) As the founder of ServiceSpace, Nipun Mehta is a well-known “incubator of generosity-driven projects.” While much research has been conducted on the positive effects of generosity, our society has not fully utilized it when it comes to designing systems based on generosity. We do not see livelihoods that naturally promote intrinsic human connection and value giving. Organizational structures, social hierarchy, and status quo are also more aligned with those with an enterprising mindset. In fact, being resourceful has become so much of a norm that anyone trying to be a giver is seen as a not-so-serious candidate in the race to success. Why hasn't generosity evolved into work compensation models? The last decade and a half has seen a notable increase in the number of people opting for a post-graduation MBA. It has evolved to become a prerequisite for management positions. This has also led to the emerging importance of managing people in the right way. It has become evident that this industry cannot be taken lightly. The concepts of work-life balance, employee engagement, and Maslow's theory of motivation evolved, proving that there were things beyond money that motivated people to get things done in a job. People have realized that it's not just the paycheck that can lead to job satisfaction and productivity in the field. It was a good revelation to the world. Management began to change their perspective to offer more comprehensive packages that touched on various motivating factors. Yet we did not find research progressing along the path of integrating the intrinsic motivations of philanthropy and sense of giving into employee-employer transactions. The return on investment matrix, which has become the backbone of evaluating job compensation models, has no alternatives. Return on Investment If job compensation models were based on the belief that giving precedes getting, rather than getting leads to giving, we should have seen a world with completely different metrics for human resource managers. When money is spent on employees with the motive of expecting something tangible in return, the seed of the transaction is planted. Even if the company spends on things that are beneficial not only to it, but also to the employees, the motive of getting something in return from them undermines the act of investing in them. The purity of the investment decreases. This is because, whether it is explicitly apparent or not, people capture the true motivations of those who help them in the first place. It may not always be conscious, but it is often reflected in behavior. Return on investment is a matrix borrowed from money markets. It works wonderfully in these markets for decision making. However, its applicability to living things is something rarely questioneddiscussion. We never see this matrix used in human relationships other than work. A husband does not control his wife's ROI. A father does not control his son. A teacher does not teach pupils to see the ROI for themselves. True friendship isn't about ROI. Yet this very matrix has become the backbone of job compensation models. The main reason why its implementation was never questioned could be attributed to fear. Companies fear being generous. They doubt that in this dog-eat-dog world such a prospect can be taken for granted. Another reason could simply be the unavailability of alternative matrices. We don't know what to implement other than implementing ROI. Measurement is important to know where we are going. However, we see some areas where ROI can be removed. Businesses often forget that not everything has to be a transaction. Some things are meant to be transformative. For example, the Indian government and several state governments across the country offer special occasional leaves to employees who wish to participate in a 10-day silent mediation retreat in India. This is an authorized, no-strings-attached leave, where the government expects nothing in return from employees who complete such courses. There is no ROI control. There are no measurements of training results. It is simply an act to help employees live a healthy life. The reason is to bring a transformation to the employees on a personal level, which would eventually spill over into their work life and bring greater benefits to both of them. In fact, the state of Madhya Pradesh has made it mandatory for government school teachers to take one of these courses in their first years on the job. Tata Steel is organizing a 10-day adventure camp for its new management trainees in their first year. While these are not major investments, they have the potential to be major reasons for motivation. And the employees understand it too. If this trend follows, we could see such pure investments increase in number, overshadowing ROI ones and introducing new matrices to measure. Employee Utilization As per the dictionary, utilization means “the state of being used”. Employee utilization is another matrix we see evolving from shop floor terminology. In the workshop, a machine is considered useful if it is used. An unused machine is junk that takes up space. However, when this logic is applied to humans, uncharted territory opens up. While as far as machines are concerned, they can only do the things they are intended for. When it comes to people, there is no such thing as one person can only perform one set of similar tasks. If that were the case, creative ideas would never have existed. Another thing is that unlike machines, humans work as teams, groups and mentors. There is human-to-human interaction which is another sphere of maximum utility. If an employer is heavily oriented towards this matrix, we see employees disengage from doing anything beyond what they are paid to do. In reality they transform into machines, capable of carrying out only a series of activities. This matrix is ​​also actually responsible for killing the motivation that comes from salaries. When a human being understands that the relationship is simply based on mutual use, the return obtained appears to be only the exchange value, nothing more. It sounds similar to the word usage, it's the word utility. According to the dictionary it means “the quality of being of practical use”. What is most important for a company? Maybe that an employee should be squeezed to the core bymorning to evening when he is on paid duty so that, like machines, there is no wasted capacity? Or should an employee be a useful resource for the company, who has good will towards him and helps him when he is in ill health and needs support? When someone has good will towards someone, there is nothing they wouldn't want to make the subject of good will be happy. This is where generosity in action is born. Generosity in action refers to giving one's attention, care, time and skills for the well-being of others. An example of donating one's time in line with generosity is highlighted in the Love machine approach developed by Linden Lab, the company behind the virtual world Second Life. (Grant, 2013) He says: “In a high-tech company, many employees aim to protect their time and carefully guard information, instead of sharing their time and knowledge with colleagues. The Love Machine was designed to overcome this trend by allowing employees to send a message of love when they appreciate a coworker's help. The messages of love were visible to others, rewarded and recognized the gift by linking it to status and reputation. The effects of such activities on the company's brand image, public relations, success and market loyalty are studied. Acts of generosity within the organization, i.e. interactions between employer and employee, or employee and employee, or employer and third-party suppliers, lenders and carriers, is what this document aims to talk about. Considering existing business models and research, few below have approached the topic highlighted here: Haski-Leventhal (2012) conducted research on payroll. The research states: “Payroll donations refer to ongoing donations made by employees through payroll deduction, usually to a charity, chosen by their employer, or to one of a few charities they can choose from. “Research findings have shown that payroll can increase employee engagement. A restaurant in Ahmedabad, called Seva Café, serves food to customers with a menu that says Price 0/- Rs and has this footnote: "Your meal was a gift from someone who came before you. For keep the chain of gifts alive, we invite you to pay in advance for those who dine after you." (Seva Cafe: Living is Giving) They say it's a peer-to-peer experiment in generosity. A similar concept can be seen in the Karma Kitchen restaurant chain, which has expanded to many locations and countries around the world. (Karma Kitchen: Growing in Generosity) Another famous business model along these lines is the living example of an rickshaw driver in Ahmedabad, named Udaybhai Jadav. (Roysam, 2017) stated: “His (the rickshaw) meter would perpetually read zero and any surprised passenger, at the end of the ride, would receive an envelope with a greeting card reading 'Pay with your heart' explaining that whatever wishes to pay will be used for the next passenger." For the last 8 years he has been running his rickshaw this way. From all these examples we could see that generosity in action has great potential in the field of business and corporate institutions. It is a valid alternative to existing economic models. While the scalability of this model is still a pristine area of ​​research, the initial benefits that accrue from it are reason enough to look into it further. Conclusion As Mahatma Gandhi said, "Be the change you wish to see in the world", we are today at a crossroads in what it means to work and the changes we make today will establish the.