Ideal company?
It so happened that I had to either work myself or cooperate with companies of various sizes and levels: from two-person firms to transnational monsters. The theoretical pros and cons (flexibility versus resources, etc.) are known and obvious. However, based on personal experience, there were some considerations about how companies of different sizes work (and how they work with them), which I want to share with Habrachiteliki.
Remark: we will not consider the sphere of trade in consumer goods - beer and bread kiosks, as well as supermarkets, have somewhat different means of fighting for the client. It will focus mainly on large-scale production, development, IT and industrial automation (areas that I know best of all).
Most often LLC, maybe even SP. In many ways, the style of work of such a company determines the history of its occurrence and options are possible here.
Option 1 . An excellent specialist who is tired of working "for an uncle" goes into free swimming. Behind him, as a rule, his reputation (which he values) and, as a result, a ready-made client base. The best option for cooperation: if the specialist is also a good leader - we have competent and responsible performers, working with whom is a pleasure.
')
Option 2 . Very characteristic of Russia. Know where from in the hands of a certain resource, around which the business is built. There are a lot of examples: connections in state structures (or in the management of a large company) provide an order or help crush competitors; managed to divert customer base from the previous employer; the debtor paid the equipment, etc. etc. The head is often little aware of what his company is doing, compensating for this with the ability to communicate and connections - the main thing is to conclude an agreement, and there we will think of something. Characteristic feature: instead of hiring qualified specialists, hiring students who, having gained experience, will run away, freeing up a new place.
If you have to choose such a company as a contractor, the choice at first glance is obvious: option 1. But do not forget what country we live in - if, in addition to doing the work itself, some coordination, approval, etc. will be required. (for example, objects controlled by Rostekhnadzor) - having the company of appropriate connections can make life easier.
Ltd., ZAO or even OAO. This may be a small production, a relatively large regional supplier of equipment, etc. Based on personal experience, in such companies everything is arranged in the most reasonable way: to solve a problem you don’t have to go through all circles of bureaucratic hell, there are enough resources to work stably and at the same time not so much - to waste them is unwise.
In such companies, the “customer – money” relationship is still quite strong, so they cherish the customer and keep for a profitable order.
Very large. This also includes the majority of state-owned companies, regardless of their size. A characteristic feature: from the point of view of staff outside the headquarters, the money is not paid by clients, but by an uncle in Moscow, Germany, Switzerland ... well, depending on where their uncle is.
An example from personal experience. The company, which is a part of a large international concern, lost about 800 thousand rubles a year due to over-expenditure of raw materials. The headquarters ordered to overcome the losses, for which the company purchased equipment worth 10 million rubles. The losses were reduced, before the headquarters they reported on the fulfillment of their prescription, the headquarters was satisfied: she was not aware that the equipment would wear out before it paid off.
A typical example. Instead of saving - reducing some expenses by raising others, instead of modernizing production - introducing "progressive forms of management", instead of motivating employees - team building, instead of quality - quality management.
And to whom the situation is not familiar: at the end of the year, the money left in the budget is being spent urgently. For anything - otherwise the budget will be cut next year.
At the same time, more than once I had to read and hear about how everything is fine arranged in such giants as Google, Apple ... I don’t know, maybe they are lying, or maybe it all depends on the mission that its creators chose for the company: to earn more money or change the world. After all, a large company can do both ...
Remark: we will not consider the sphere of trade in consumer goods - beer and bread kiosks, as well as supermarkets, have somewhat different means of fighting for the client. It will focus mainly on large-scale production, development, IT and industrial automation (areas that I know best of all).
Type 1. Small company
Most often LLC, maybe even SP. In many ways, the style of work of such a company determines the history of its occurrence and options are possible here.
Option 1 . An excellent specialist who is tired of working "for an uncle" goes into free swimming. Behind him, as a rule, his reputation (which he values) and, as a result, a ready-made client base. The best option for cooperation: if the specialist is also a good leader - we have competent and responsible performers, working with whom is a pleasure.
')
Option 2 . Very characteristic of Russia. Know where from in the hands of a certain resource, around which the business is built. There are a lot of examples: connections in state structures (or in the management of a large company) provide an order or help crush competitors; managed to divert customer base from the previous employer; the debtor paid the equipment, etc. etc. The head is often little aware of what his company is doing, compensating for this with the ability to communicate and connections - the main thing is to conclude an agreement, and there we will think of something. Characteristic feature: instead of hiring qualified specialists, hiring students who, having gained experience, will run away, freeing up a new place.
If you have to choose such a company as a contractor, the choice at first glance is obvious: option 1. But do not forget what country we live in - if, in addition to doing the work itself, some coordination, approval, etc. will be required. (for example, objects controlled by Rostekhnadzor) - having the company of appropriate connections can make life easier.
Type 2. Medium company
Ltd., ZAO or even OAO. This may be a small production, a relatively large regional supplier of equipment, etc. Based on personal experience, in such companies everything is arranged in the most reasonable way: to solve a problem you don’t have to go through all circles of bureaucratic hell, there are enough resources to work stably and at the same time not so much - to waste them is unwise.
In such companies, the “customer – money” relationship is still quite strong, so they cherish the customer and keep for a profitable order.
Type 3. Large company
Very large. This also includes the majority of state-owned companies, regardless of their size. A characteristic feature: from the point of view of staff outside the headquarters, the money is not paid by clients, but by an uncle in Moscow, Germany, Switzerland ... well, depending on where their uncle is.
An example from personal experience. The company, which is a part of a large international concern, lost about 800 thousand rubles a year due to over-expenditure of raw materials. The headquarters ordered to overcome the losses, for which the company purchased equipment worth 10 million rubles. The losses were reduced, before the headquarters they reported on the fulfillment of their prescription, the headquarters was satisfied: she was not aware that the equipment would wear out before it paid off.
A typical example. Instead of saving - reducing some expenses by raising others, instead of modernizing production - introducing "progressive forms of management", instead of motivating employees - team building, instead of quality - quality management.
And to whom the situation is not familiar: at the end of the year, the money left in the budget is being spent urgently. For anything - otherwise the budget will be cut next year.
At the same time, more than once I had to read and hear about how everything is fine arranged in such giants as Google, Apple ... I don’t know, maybe they are lying, or maybe it all depends on the mission that its creators chose for the company: to earn more money or change the world. After all, a large company can do both ...
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/111380/
All Articles