'The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak': If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

A company executive said to me:

"Mr. Xiao, it's so comfortable to work in our company. You may not even know your surname every day. To be honest, although I don't really agree with this kind of comfortable life, I think I can sit like this and get paid every day. It's really worth it, but there is a problem in front of me. The combat effectiveness of the team I lead is relatively weak. In the past few months, although I can complete the tasks explained above, the tasks are the same every month. How can I improve the combat capability of the team I lead without getting a bonus?"

"Is your company busy every day from your superiors to your subordinates, or is it just you alone? Are there sound rules and regulations? If so, have they been implemented as required?" I asked.

"In my impression, my superior leader is actually a leader who throws his hands. He just regularly checks whether my work is completed on schedule every month. Most of the time, he basically drinks tea outside, and I leave everything in the store to me. As for my subordinates, I arrange work for them one by one every day, and they can also complete it ahead of time, and generally they tend to be leisurely. The rules and regulations are very sound, and almost no one will touch it.” He replied.

"Is there a performance appraisal system? Is the division of labor very clear?"

"There is currently no such system for assessment, and the division of labor is generally clear, but sometimes everyone is doing it together, running business together, and sharing performance together," he replied.

"The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak": If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

It is not difficult to find that the company where this executive friend works has a lot of management loopholes. I summarize these management loopholes as follows:

① The superior leadership has a weak sense of responsibility, is not strict in requirements, and is too comfortable with the status quo.

In the conversation with this friend, it can be found that the company he works for is likely to be a subsidiary company. After all, as a director, he has only one leader. This leader lives a very casual life, and often goes out to drink tea, which shows that this leader has the highest position in this company and has the highest right to speak, otherwise he will not come and go like this.

This leader only checks the completion results of the work tasks within the specified time every time, and never cares about the entire implementation process. It can be seen that his sense of responsibility is relatively weak. A leader with a strong sense of responsibility does not necessarily inspect the operation of each work point every day, but he will definitely pay special attention to the progress of the work of subordinates. After all, this is the team he leads, and ultimately all success or failure will be linked to himself.

Furthermore, it can be seen that this leader is too loose in his requirements for work results and subordinates, and is too comfortable with the status quo. The employees can complete the work content arranged by him every month in advance, which is enough to show that the saturation of the work is far from enough. A motivated leader should lead the entire team to sprint for the next one after completing the goal of one month. A higher goal, not just the pursuit of leisure and comfort all day long.

②The supervisor lacks active consciousness, and the management "concept" is relatively vague.

As a manager, once you discover the existence of a problem, you must take the initiative to find ways to solve the problem. The longer the problem remains, the greater the harm it may eventually cause and the greater the impact on the entire team. Not only that, managers must not be content with the status quo. Once they are content with the status quo, it will inevitably affect the enthusiasm of their subordinates.

Low-level management only focuses on management, and only manages affairs; while high-level managers focus on management, not only managing "people's hearts", but also their attitude towards work.

③ There is a lack of a practical assessment system. For any employer, the lack of a practical assessment system is actually a tragedy for the employer.

As a simple example, imagine that if you often do more work than other colleagues at work, but you get the same treatment as other colleagues, as an employee, you will definitely breed this idea: Do more work and do more Less, active and inactive Since the treatment you get is the same, then what reason do you have to work hard in your future work!

"The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak": If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

After finding the source of the problem, I gave the supervisor friend the following suggestions:

1. Learn to correct your own position. As a manager, you must have a certain level of thinking

It is not difficult to find that this supervisor friend has not put himself in his right position. He is not only a supervisor, but also the first executor and proposer of this company, because the leaders above him have put all the Operational matters are handed over to him, and his leaders only need to regularly check the progress of his work.

At this time, the supervisor friend needs to improve his ideological height, treat himself as the head of the department to look at the problems encountered, and should improve his own crisis awareness. Once the leader chooses to be content with the status quo, employees will follow suit. .

Therefore, the most feasible way is to think about how to properly schedule the workload of the employees under them. Only when employees are under pressure can they be motivated. Fight for the goals that can be completed ahead of time, and the team's combat ability will only stop.

2. The reason why the team's combat effectiveness is weak is actually a manifestation of the leader's lack of "temperament"

The workplace is like a battlefield. It is not only about strategy and tactics, but also about morale. One of the most important factors affecting morale depends on the confidence displayed by the generals themselves.

A general who is often victorious, even if he leads a small team to fight on the battlefield, he will not be afraid to fight more and more bravely. And even if a general with insufficient confidence leads a huge team, it is possible to lose the battle with more battles and less.

In the workplace, as a "leader of the army", you must learn to take the lead, so that employees can unconditionally believe in themselves, and only then will employees' desire to fight and win in the battlefield be inspired. This is like the most famous "wolf-sheep effect" in management. Even a group of soft sheep, as long as the leader is a wolf, over time, this group of soft sheep will definitely become as fierce as a wolf.

"The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak": If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

3. Establish a set of practical performance appraisal system.

The existence of the performance appraisal system has two important functions:

①To better stimulate the enthusiasm and enthusiasm of employees. Some employees work purely to make money, while others work purely to pass the time.

② Better distinguish between talents and scum. In today's workplace, the era of eating a big pot of rice has passed. Who can create more practical value for the employer, who can get more development space, and vice versa.

In many workplace cases I have come into contact with, I found that many employers will suffer from the phenomenon of eating a big pot of rice, which will lead to the low combat effectiveness of the entire team and the loss of excellent talents. So how to avoid this similar situation, in fact, in addition to establishing a practical performance appraisal system, it is also necessary to establish a practical last-place elimination rule, so as to achieve the effect of checks and balances.

Useless employees are cleared out, so as to replenish the new energy and make it better for them. In other words, it is to adopt the principle of saving the good and eliminating the bad, and keep the employees who are useful to the employer.

"The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak": If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

So here comes the problem. There will always be some differences between the members of each team in terms of personal ability and personal performance. No matter how they run, there will always be someone who will be first in the list, and someone will always be first in the bottom.

It can't be said that an employee who usually performs better than the last one will be removed from the team, nor can it be said that an employee who was among the top performers in the previous month and the last one in this month's performance will be removed from the team. There are certain limitations and contingency. Therefore, the establishment of the last-place elimination rule should comprehensively evaluate employees' work performance and work achievements by means of scientific evaluation, implement corresponding rewards and punishments, or formulate corresponding measures according to the comprehensive results evaluated, such as Their salary increase, promotion, salary reduction, demotion, persuading them to leave and other corresponding measures.

Not only that, but also the following points should be noted:

①As a manager, you must understand what kind of people the last-place elimination system applies to, in other words, what type of employees should be eliminated.

A manager of the human resources department, Li, once told me that their company also habitually adopts the last-place elimination system. Since the implementation of this system, many employees have been eliminated. Some of those eliminated employees performed very well, but their performance was relatively poor; others involved a lot of work, but did not produce work results; of course, there were also employees who insisted on principles, so that they ended up offending many people. These types of people tend to get the lowest score when grading each month. According to the last-place elimination system, these people are all passed out.

It is precisely the operation of this last-place elimination system that makes the entire company panic. Those who perform well no longer dare to blindly perform well, because in their opinion, no matter how well they perform, they may be passed; People who are involved in a lot of work because of their limited energy, naturally can’t take up too many jobs and offer to leave; those who dare to tell the truth will eventually tell lies even if they want to tell the truth, because they are afraid of offending others , offend leaders.

From the above real case, it will be found that if the last-place elimination system is not measured and considered in many aspects, it may eventually bring some disadvantages to the team, so that the excellent employees who are truly considerate of the employer in the end dare not speak the truth , Do the facts, but let those who eat and drink all day be at ease.

As a manager, you must understand what kind of people the last-place elimination system applies to, in other words, what type of employees to eliminate. Only after it is determined what kind of objects the last-place elimination system applies to, can it be correctly evaluated.

"The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak": If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

② Managers should comprehensively evaluate employees from a fair and impartial perspective, rather than drawing conclusions from one-sidedly looking at their performance.

To give a simple example, due to the different division of labor for each position in the workplace, the content of their work is naturally different. At this time, the final score of an employee cannot only be measured by the quality of performance, but should be Based on the employee's usual performance, basic work ability, attitude towards work, work contribution made in the post, and development potential, a comprehensive evaluation is carried out.

For employees with outstanding performance, they can naturally consider providing promotion positions, giving them the opportunity to show themselves, so that they can better show their greatest talents; for those employees with poor performance or ordinary performance in a short period of time, managers can not only give them the opportunity to show their talents. In addition to scoring, you should also help them find the root cause, which can help them grow and change for the better, instead of just passing them. It is necessary to understand that when horses fail, and people fail, give them a chance first, and consider eliminating them if they really neglect their work.

From the perspective of managers, if they cannot hear the truth of the employees, it is very likely that they will be deceived due to the closure of information, which will eventually affect the development of work. The reason why it is mentioned that managers should evaluate employees from a fair and impartial standpoint is that it is inevitable that some employees will say some truths that are not uncomfortable for leaders at work. Therefore, when evaluating employees comprehensively , must not be mixed with personal grudges.

"The work is too idle, the team's combat effectiveness is too weak": If you don't understand these points, you can only be a rookie manager

③ For the formulation of the last elimination system, managers should combine the characteristics of the work industry to make the most suitable system for the employer, rather than follow the trend.

Each industry has different industry characteristics. In some industries, it may be easy to recruit talents. As long as there are vacancies, you can recruit employees suitable for your unit at any time. For this type of employer, the elimination system at the bottom may be blunt, and bluntness may be more practical for them.

But if this blunt system is used in an industry that is difficult to recruit, even if the system is really good, it may not be applicable to this industry that is difficult to recruit. You must know that once an employer matures, the cost of eliminating an employee and retraining an employee is actually very high, especially for this type of employer that is difficult to recruit.

In management, the construction of the system is never the best, only the most suitable and unsuitable.

Therefore, when formulating the last elimination system, we must consider how practical this system is for the industry. The purpose of the last elimination system is actually a strong management mechanism, which makes employees feel a kind of pressure, so as to stimulate their own motivation, keep them motivated to work, and form a competitive cycle, so as to improve personal performance. Efficiency and team benefits.