Richard Florida's books and writing about the "creative class" seem to either inspire or annoy. Who doesn't want to be in the "creative" class? Is the alternative to be in a lower, non-creative class? That stinks of elitism and egocentricity.

It is a subtle but important distinction; creativity is the cause, not the attribute of the class. The nature of creative work requires constantly generating new ideas. This is in dramatic contrast to "working class" or "service class" occupations where the people may be very creative, but their work is very tangible and predictable.

Creative work does not fit a 9-5 mold, and it is not a fungible commodity. The paradigms and assumptions that fit a working class world break down when they are applied to the type of occupations that are becoming typical, especially for younger workers today. An entire industry has been spawned attempting to explain generational attitudes and provide a roadmap to a supposed conflict between "boomers" and younger workers. In fact, the conflict is not age-based, but deeply rooted in the mixed work experiences of all of use who are now going through a societal transformation.

What I find most fascinating about the idea of a creative class is that we are not simply victims of some unseen force that is disrupting everything. The fact is, we are all adapting, as we need to, in order to do our work effectively. Getting in to work at 9am doesn't help you get ahead. Thinking about work while you are at home; perhaps having an insight into some issue you were unable to resolve in the office, while you are running or riding your bike is the kind of thing that really makes a difference in your professional life.

That dynamic is changing us. Many will bemoan how employers are expecting us to take our work home with us and expecting us to be "passionate" about our jobs. But even if we manage boundaries and balance our lives, the fact of the matter is that the nature of our work requires us to think differently than workers in previous eras did. We cannot afford to compartmentalize. There is no time clock to punch out anymore.

Not only do those kinds of requirements intrude upon our "family time" or "personal time" they become pervasive in our thinking. The issue is not that a work commitment prevents us from going to a child's baseball game; the issue is that when we are at that game, a part of us is still at the office. If our work environment is competitive and hostile, we may find ourselves interacting with people outside of work in the same manner. It is very hard to shift gears effectively.

Boundaries are not the answer; fit is. Fit means that we need to find work where we are treated with respect, where we have control over our time, and where we know what our contribution is and that it is appreciated. In our parents' generation, sacrifice was the norm; typically the man was expected to work hard and provide for his family, even if the job provided no satisfaction. Of course, not all work was a living hell, but it was expected that life was hard, work was difficult, and you did your duty to provide for your family.

What people of all generations are realizing now is that sacrifice is not only self-sacrifice. The work we do changes us and those changes, if they are bad, extract an indirect price from our families also. A paycheck is not enough.