Google tries (tried? it&#x27;s been a couple years, and the culture was changing when I left) very hard to do that, and they actually have the money spigot to make it work (for the most part).<p>The problem with the idea in general is that money usually flows from the party deriving the benefit to the party providing it.  So if the company&#x27;s top priority really was to provide a great place to work, then logically, the employees should be paying it to work there.  Indeed, places that are often considered great places to work (Google, Palantir, Fog Creek, philanthropy, non-profits, education) are often notorious for underpaying their workers relative to where they could employ their skills elsewhere.  If a company took this to the logical extreme - making the employees the consumers of the product&#x2F;service - then it would cease to be &quot;work&quot;, and would instead be a &quot;hobby&#x2F;internship&#x2F;volunteer&#x2F;education&#x2F;experience&quot;.