For employees, the central theme of work is the meaning they can give it. Work has to have meaning. And if it doesn't, we have to find some.
The meaning we find in work is first and foremost linked to the role it plays in a chain of activity. This is the most common understanding of the meaning of work.
Then, when David Graeber speaks of BullShit Job[1], he is defining a job devoid of interest, a job that is so unrewarding that it has lost its sense of effort. A job that could much better be done by a machine.
Finally, to speak of the meaning of work is also to give it a spiritual, philosophical value, a reason that goes beyond the action itself. It means asking whether work fulfills a societal, transcendent function.
Managing your feelings about the value of the work you do is a very complicated business. How can a company be sure that all the activities useful to its business are interesting and rewarding for the person carrying them out? There are always tasks that are tedious, not much fun, and sometimes even long and boring. But as long as a machine or computer hasn't taken control of them, it's up to a human to deal with them.
It's much easier to answer the question: am I useful for something in my work? And it's a lot easier to find the answer.
By valuing the service link in relation to the team, to the project, and to the organization as a whole, it becomes acceptable to perform boring and interesting tasks from time to time.
The feeling of usefulness can be stimulated in two ways:
[1] Coutrot Thomas, « Bullshit Jobs. David Graeber, Paris, Les Liens qui libèrent, 2018, 416 p. », Travail et emploi, 2019/4 (n° 160), p. 131-133. URL : https://www.cairn.info/revue-travail-et-emploi-2019-4-page-131.htm