I don't buy the dichotomy between work and life, and maybe those ideas should be thrown out altogether. The whole notion of 'work' is flawed.
I have no idea what sort of response you're looking for.
There's a pretty compelling quote from the first chapter of The Fifth Discipline:
"There is also another, in some ways deeper, movement toward learning organizations, part of the evolution of industrial society. Material affluence for the majority has gradually shifted people’s orientation toward work— from what Daniel Yankelovich called an “instrumental” view of work, where work was a means to an end, to a more “sacred” view, where people seek the “intrinsic” benefits of work. “Our grandfathers worked six days a week to earn what most of us now earn by Tuesday afternoon,” says Bill O’Brien, former CEO of Hanover Insurance. “The ferment in management will continue until we build organizations that are more consistent with man’s higher aspirations beyond food, shelter and belonging. Moreover, many who share these values are now in leadership positions. I find a growing number of organizational leaders who, while still a minority, feel they are part of a profound evolution in the nature of work as a social institution. “Why can’t we do good works at work?”"
Senge, Peter M. (2010-03-25). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization (pp. 4-5). The Doubleday Religious Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
The general premise of work-life balance is finding a level of deference between the thing that makes you money and the things you get to do with that money when not attempting the goal of making the money. This interest in a different motivating factor, "good works at work," while noble is NOT an alternative to work-life balance, but a supplement. Investment in your "higher calling" may be with your church group, volunteering, donations, etc; and some offices do community outreach as parts of their team processes, but I'm not seeing it as a direct alternative to work-life balance.
If YOU are wanting to motivate YOUR work through a higher purpose or need, then by all means go ahead. You're given the station to do so through the income that you are afforded through your work. But I'm very much NOT motivated to donate my time to some corporate goal of altruism, because a corporation doesn't do anything for free.
But it's not limited to those people: many people do lots of work that doesn't earn any money and lots of people earn money without doing any work.
Lots of people start another company after a successful exit, and I'd bet their motivation is not 'the goal of making money'.
I reject those definitions. This is the sort of thinking I believe no longer works. Or at least doesn't work for me. I'm inquiring about alternatives to this.
A company or corporation inherently isn't and can't be fully altruistic, by the very nature of how a company works; it's essentially a work trade, you give them your time and labor, they give you money - they're not in the business of existential self fulfillment. You use Elon Musk as an example, but I would hazard to guess that while he may find existential fulfillment through what he does, it's not his top priority for his employees. I would venture to guess that his top goal for his employees is to have them continue to contribute to the goal of sending a rocket into space, make better batteries, etc.
Existential Fulfillment is your own responsibility and no one else's, if you want to find a place that meets all of maslows needs - for you - then start a company that does that for you. But don't assume your altruism will also fulfill someone else's top spots on the maslow pyramid; because self-actualization can only come from self.