When You Have to Assign Work No One Wants to DoSKIP TO CONTENTHarvard Business Review LogoHarvard Business Review LogoMotivating people|When You Have to Assign Work No One Wants to DoSubscribeSign InLatestMagazineTopicsPodcastsStoreReading ListsData & VisualsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutiveSearch hbr.orgSubscribeLatestPodcastsThe MagazineStoreWebinarsNewslettersAll TopicsReading ListsData & VisualsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutiveMy LibraryAccount SettingsSign InExplore HBRLatestThe MagazinePodcastsStoreWebinarsNewslettersPopular TopicsManaging YourselfLeadershipStrategyManaging TeamsGenderInnovationWork-life BalanceAll TopicsFor SubscribersReading ListsData & VisualsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutiveSubscribeMy AccountMy LibraryTopic FeedsOrdersAccount SettingsEmail PreferencesSign InHarvard Business Review LogoMotivating peopleWhen You Have to Assign Work No One Wants to Do by Adam Eric Greenberg, Vicki G. Morwitz and Kurt P. MunzJanuary 26, 2026Thomas Jackson/Getty ImagesPostPostShareSavePrintSummary.   Leer en españolLer em portuguêsPostPostShareSavePrintA manager assigns a team member to an unglamorous task. A senior colleague hands off a notoriously difficult client to a junior colleague. Someone must assume extra responsibilities to cover for a teammate on leave.Adam Eric Greenberg is an assistant professor of marketing at Bocconi University.Vicki G. Morwitz is the Bruce Greenwald professor of business and professor of marketing at Columbia Business School.Kurt P. Munz is an assistant professor of marketing at Bocconi University.PostPostShareSavePrintRead more on Motivating people or related topics Managing people, Management communication, Management skills, Managing employees, Collaboration and teams and DelegatingPartner CenterStart my subscription!Explore HBRThe LatestAll TopicsMagazine ArchiveReading ListsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutivePodcastsWebinarsData & VisualsMy LibraryNewslettersHBR PressHBR StoreArticle ReprintsBooksCasesCollectionsMagazine IssuesHBR Guide SeriesHBR 20-Minute ManagersHBR Emotional Intelligence SeriesHBR Must ReadsToolsAbout HBRContact UsAdvertise with UsInformation for Booksellers/RetailersMastheadGlobal EditionsMedia InquiriesGuidelines for AuthorsHBR Analytic ServicesCopyright PermissionsAccessibilityDigital AccessibilityManage My AccountMy LibraryTopic FeedsOrdersAccount SettingsEmail PreferencesHelp CenterContact Customer ServiceExplore HBRThe LatestAll TopicsMagazine ArchiveReading ListsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutivePodcastsWebinarsData & VisualsMy LibraryNewslettersHBR PressHBR StoreArticle ReprintsBooksCasesCollectionsMagazine IssuesHBR Guide SeriesHBR 20-Minute ManagersHBR Emotional Intelligence SeriesHBR Must ReadsToolsAbout HBRContact UsAdvertise with UsInformation for Booksellers/RetailersMastheadGlobal EditionsMedia InquiriesGuidelines for AuthorsHBR Analytic ServicesCopyright PermissionsAccessibilityDigital AccessibilityManage My AccountMy LibraryTopic FeedsOrdersAccount SettingsEmail PreferencesHelp CenterContact Customer ServiceFollow HBRFacebookX Corp.LinkedInInstagramYour NewsreaderHarvard Business Review LogoAbout UsCareersPrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyCopyright InformationTrademark PolicyTerms of UseHarvard Business Publishing:Higher EducationCorporate LearningHarvard Business ReviewHarvard Business SchoolCopyright ©2026 Harvard Business School Publishing. All rights reserved. Harvard Business Publishing is an affiliate of Harvard Business School.

Assigning tasks that individuals actively resist presents a persistent challenge for managers across various organizational levels. This resistance isn’t merely about dislike; it frequently stems from a complex interplay of factors including perceived inequity, potential negative consequences, a lack of understanding, and a general aversion to tasks deemed undesirable. The article, “When You Have to Assign Work No One Wants to Do,” authored by Adam Eric Greenberg, Vicki G. Morwitz, and Kurt P. Munz, delves into the nuanced strategies for navigating these situations, emphasizing a shift from traditional motivational techniques to a more considered and empathetic approach.

The core argument revolves around recognizing that simply demanding performance on unwanted tasks is fundamentally ineffective. Instead, the authors advocate for a multifaceted strategy beginning with a thorough understanding of the underlying reasons for the aversion. The initial step involves identifying the specific concerns driving the reluctance. This could include anxieties about skill gaps, fears of failure, perceived unfairness in task allocation, or a generalized sense of dissatisfaction with the work itself. Greenberg, Morwitz, and Munz stress the importance of direct communication, encouraging managers to engage in open and honest conversations with the reluctant employee. These dialogues should focus on validating the employee’s feelings, actively listening to their concerns, and collaboratively seeking solutions. The authors highlight that simply dismissing the employee’s sentiment as “whining” or “complaining” will only exacerbate the problem, fostering resentment and undermining trust.

A key component of the strategy centers on reframing the task. The authors suggest that the way a task is presented can significantly influence an employee’s willingness to embrace it. Transforming a seemingly unpleasant activity into something framed as an opportunity for learning, skill development, or contributing to a larger organizational goal can dramatically alter the perception. For instance, assigning a task involving data analysis might be presented not just as a required report, but as a chance to enhance analytical capabilities crucial for future promotions or strategic decision-making. This reframing should be authentic and genuinely tied to the employee’s career aspirations—a manipulative approach will quickly damage the manager's credibility. The article further posits that managers can offer support and resources to mitigate any perceived challenges associated with the task. This might include providing training, pairing the employee with a mentor, or facilitating access to necessary tools and information.

Furthermore, the authors emphasize the significance of fairness and equity in task allocation. Individuals are acutely sensitive to perceived imbalances in workload or opportunities. If a particular group of employees consistently receives undesirable assignments, it can breed resentment and negatively impact morale. Managers should therefore strive to distribute tasks equitably, considering factors such as employee skills, experience, and overall workload. Transparency in the task assignment process is paramount, ensuring that employees understand the rationale behind decisions and have a voice in the process.

The article also explores the role of recognition and reward. While monetary incentives may not always be effective motivators, acknowledging and appreciating an employee’s efforts, even when the task is unwanted, can foster a sense of value and commitment. Specific feedback, highlighting the positive impact of the employee’s work, and celebrating successes—however small—can reinforce desired behaviors. It’s crucial that the authors note that rewards should be linked to the value and impact of the task completed, not merely a generic “thank you” gesture.

Finally, the authors acknowledge that some tasks will inevitably remain undesirable. In such cases, they suggest that managers should focus on managing the employee’s experience, minimizing negative aspects, and providing support to help the employee navigate the challenges. A pragmatic approach, prioritizing a worker’s experience and relationship with their manager, is often the most effective strategy when faced with tasks that no one actively wants to do. The combination of open communication, strategic reframing, equitable task allocation, and consistent recognition represents a robust framework for addressing this pervasive managerial challenge, promoting not only task completion but also employee engagement and a healthy organizational culture.