Can bosses like change
There is such a conditional rule for evaluating the efficiency of labor and its remuneration. The first year is overpaid to employees, from the second to the fourth year they are underpaid, from the fifth year they are already paying for the stability of the system - internal and external, which ultimately results in the company's stable position in the market. The more the stability of the processes in the company depends on you, the more reliable your position and financial income.
Another thing is when a firm changes for any reason, then the guarantee of saving a place in the system is not so strong. What are the stabilizing elements in the reformed structure? Slightly more than the labor of a capable beginner. And the habits of the old-timers are already lordly, any conflict and patience with the employer will end much faster - the costs of making decisions about dismissal are lower. But to reduce the pathos of their behavior is impossible. In any flock, the suddenly earned authority will be eaten. In short, this is the reason why top managers resist most of the changes.
From the point of view of any innovator in the company, the main reason why his ideas do not meet with hot approval and immediate implementation is the envy of the immediate superiors and the fear that the activist is targeting his particular place. This is partly true, but there is a fundamental reason why in general new technologies, new business models, or even a change of CRM will be supported by few from experienced tops. "It works and do not touch" - they seemed to have borrowed this principle from the unfortunate engineers. Of course there is still too lazy to restructure, corruption schemes and weak initiators' skills in promoting their ideas, but more on that another time. In general, the causes of resistance to change the mass, as evidenced by this figure from the journal "DG". Here are the reasons mentioned and others, and which is characteristic there are the same reasons, but filed on both sides by the official hierarchy.
')
For top managers, change is the need to find a new leadership model and gain credibility, for example, on the basis of professionalism. The most "ridiculous" thing is that it makes no sense to prepare, it’s too early to improve and show your professionalism - colleagues will eat you up as a threat to stability before the authorities assess the need for change. And when the right time comes - God knows ... Director-General, too, changes are rarely on hand - unless he is the key owner. Otherwise, he will become a target for criticism with a probability that may be as small as possible, but sooner or later may be the reason for his dismissal by shareholders. The task of any CEO Akella is to find and grow his COO Mowgli, who in times of change will be able to pull out restructuring with “second number”, but if he takes on “first number” responsibility for failures, otherwise he would have missed the black label “Akella”.
An experienced manager will be recognized this way - he is careful, requires study, is always ready to accept the laurel wreath by himself and shift the crown of thorns to others. Alas, this is a natural selection. It’s a joke that any cases go through five stages: hype, confusion, search for the guilty, punishment of the innocent, awarding the uncomplicated - that's about it, about the truth of life. Conversely, a young, efficient converter that creeps forward everywhere, most likely by the age of 30–40, will earn the indelible reputation of the pustobreha-loser.
However, there is a strong opinion that without innovation there is no competitiveness. In the ranking of the most innovative companies in 2017 are the favorites of the exchange and investors. Heads up the Amazon rating for always offering more to the consumer, faster and more accurately. Other than what the company is known for are tough working conditions under which even the old-timer top manager finds it difficult to rest on his laurels. Jeffrey Bezos “burned out” through the system of labor productivity metrics any “hazing” and reaps the dividends from the company's many years of growth himself, but of course with the shareholders. And he grabs any idea that seems to him promising, especially if the idea was brought by customers. Starting with dumping books, Jeff is now proceeding to launching telecommunications satellites for the French into orbit and announces plans for regular flights to the moon.
In 2017, Amazon was awarded the 1st place for maintaining the pace of introduction of new products and expansion of old ones. Amazon simultaneously achieves the title of the largest online store in India and starts the program of these offline stores. It broadcasts video games, TV shows and delivers its real logistics and offline showcases to all willing volunteers. Jeff himself is spinning and other employees do not live in peace. From here and all the changes, says George Deeb, managing partner of the consulting company Red Rocket Ventures. In more detail about the diaphoretic, creative, brutal and cynical personnel policy in Amazone, Habr has already written, if you are interested, see here .
"Fortunately" in most companies is not so. You can fully fatten yourself on the well-deserved authority and indulge in meditating on your own career or planning new products. Of course, portraying employment and hectic activity. Calm employees are also quite creative. For a long time, or rather a quarter of a century until the end of the 90s, Japanese electronics manufacturers were the best in the world, and their brands were highly valued - from Sharp calculators to Vaio laptops. At the same time, a personnel management system called “Theory Z” was used in Japan. This management scheme was based on a lifetime employment system. One of the main criteria for calculating an employee’s salary was his experience. With innovation, it somehow got along well.
In general, or you have such a boss as Bezos and you already have enough movement at work, or colleagues with the authorities will do everything to prevent your idea from being implemented. Until the thunder clap. Allies among the shareholders look too tortured. Somewhere out of despair they went for military cunning and, with the help of journalists, anonymously voiced their ideas, put the authorities in the digests and then, after about six months or a year, asked for opinions on the topic of the interview. Here the authorities and illuminates. A good way, but the idea is now not yours. At best, trust to work and implement. Under the wise leadership, which is "not in the subject." We will have to prepare a cycle of articles in advance with a lag of a month or two, about the best ways of step-by-step implementation of the plan ...
In practice, there are two ways if you want to implement your idea in your company.
Another thing is when a firm changes for any reason, then the guarantee of saving a place in the system is not so strong. What are the stabilizing elements in the reformed structure? Slightly more than the labor of a capable beginner. And the habits of the old-timers are already lordly, any conflict and patience with the employer will end much faster - the costs of making decisions about dismissal are lower. But to reduce the pathos of their behavior is impossible. In any flock, the suddenly earned authority will be eaten. In short, this is the reason why top managers resist most of the changes.
From the point of view of any innovator in the company, the main reason why his ideas do not meet with hot approval and immediate implementation is the envy of the immediate superiors and the fear that the activist is targeting his particular place. This is partly true, but there is a fundamental reason why in general new technologies, new business models, or even a change of CRM will be supported by few from experienced tops. "It works and do not touch" - they seemed to have borrowed this principle from the unfortunate engineers. Of course there is still too lazy to restructure, corruption schemes and weak initiators' skills in promoting their ideas, but more on that another time. In general, the causes of resistance to change the mass, as evidenced by this figure from the journal "DG". Here are the reasons mentioned and others, and which is characteristic there are the same reasons, but filed on both sides by the official hierarchy.
')
For top managers, change is the need to find a new leadership model and gain credibility, for example, on the basis of professionalism. The most "ridiculous" thing is that it makes no sense to prepare, it’s too early to improve and show your professionalism - colleagues will eat you up as a threat to stability before the authorities assess the need for change. And when the right time comes - God knows ... Director-General, too, changes are rarely on hand - unless he is the key owner. Otherwise, he will become a target for criticism with a probability that may be as small as possible, but sooner or later may be the reason for his dismissal by shareholders. The task of any CEO Akella is to find and grow his COO Mowgli, who in times of change will be able to pull out restructuring with “second number”, but if he takes on “first number” responsibility for failures, otherwise he would have missed the black label “Akella”.
An experienced manager will be recognized this way - he is careful, requires study, is always ready to accept the laurel wreath by himself and shift the crown of thorns to others. Alas, this is a natural selection. It’s a joke that any cases go through five stages: hype, confusion, search for the guilty, punishment of the innocent, awarding the uncomplicated - that's about it, about the truth of life. Conversely, a young, efficient converter that creeps forward everywhere, most likely by the age of 30–40, will earn the indelible reputation of the pustobreha-loser.
Between diaphoretic and stagnant control systems
However, there is a strong opinion that without innovation there is no competitiveness. In the ranking of the most innovative companies in 2017 are the favorites of the exchange and investors. Heads up the Amazon rating for always offering more to the consumer, faster and more accurately. Other than what the company is known for are tough working conditions under which even the old-timer top manager finds it difficult to rest on his laurels. Jeffrey Bezos “burned out” through the system of labor productivity metrics any “hazing” and reaps the dividends from the company's many years of growth himself, but of course with the shareholders. And he grabs any idea that seems to him promising, especially if the idea was brought by customers. Starting with dumping books, Jeff is now proceeding to launching telecommunications satellites for the French into orbit and announces plans for regular flights to the moon.
In 2017, Amazon was awarded the 1st place for maintaining the pace of introduction of new products and expansion of old ones. Amazon simultaneously achieves the title of the largest online store in India and starts the program of these offline stores. It broadcasts video games, TV shows and delivers its real logistics and offline showcases to all willing volunteers. Jeff himself is spinning and other employees do not live in peace. From here and all the changes, says George Deeb, managing partner of the consulting company Red Rocket Ventures. In more detail about the diaphoretic, creative, brutal and cynical personnel policy in Amazone, Habr has already written, if you are interested, see here .
"Fortunately" in most companies is not so. You can fully fatten yourself on the well-deserved authority and indulge in meditating on your own career or planning new products. Of course, portraying employment and hectic activity. Calm employees are also quite creative. For a long time, or rather a quarter of a century until the end of the 90s, Japanese electronics manufacturers were the best in the world, and their brands were highly valued - from Sharp calculators to Vaio laptops. At the same time, a personnel management system called “Theory Z” was used in Japan. This management scheme was based on a lifetime employment system. One of the main criteria for calculating an employee’s salary was his experience. With innovation, it somehow got along well.
The theory of "Z" was proposed in the 80s of the twentieth century, by the American professor Ouchi in the development of the ideas of Taylor and Mac Gregor.
- The theory of "Z" states that the main thing is to have in the team the overwhelming number of people focused on stable goals of activity. Then the company works as efficiently as possible. The most stable prospect is a lifetime link to the company. This theory is consistent with the Japanese workers in large industrial companies, but such workers exist in virtually all countries in large, stable enterprises.
- The theory of "X" describes a person as a natural lazy, who usually does not want to work and, if possible, avoids work. The company's management is forced to resort to hard (total control and penal system) and soft (persuasion and encouragement) forms of coercion.
- The theory of "Y" says that for a person to spend moral and physical strength on work is as natural as rest or play. This means that a person can be encouraged to work, if given the opportunity to fully open up, to take responsibility, to feel their importance for the organization.
What follows from this?
In general, or you have such a boss as Bezos and you already have enough movement at work, or colleagues with the authorities will do everything to prevent your idea from being implemented. Until the thunder clap. Allies among the shareholders look too tortured. Somewhere out of despair they went for military cunning and, with the help of journalists, anonymously voiced their ideas, put the authorities in the digests and then, after about six months or a year, asked for opinions on the topic of the interview. Here the authorities and illuminates. A good way, but the idea is now not yours. At best, trust to work and implement. Under the wise leadership, which is "not in the subject." We will have to prepare a cycle of articles in advance with a lag of a month or two, about the best ways of step-by-step implementation of the plan ...
In practice, there are two ways if you want to implement your idea in your company.
- Spin-off That is, a small subsidiary startup with its employer. We need an ally from the authorities (development director or innovation manager), then convince the person in charge of corporate-oriented start-up accelerators (there are about ten of them) that industry demand will be, then everyone will convince the business angel that there is a demand . Having received promises of 30/70 investments to return to their home firm for 70% of investments, they have already practically “sold the idea”.
- Interested in new features or new service capabilities of the largest client of the company.
This path is more difficult. Without knowledge of pain points and cooperation with KAM on sales is not enough. And the latter is absolutely not necessary. We look at the beginning of the post ... Then we take the 2nd largest client, the 3rd and so on ... So far we don’t find a CAM from whom the client has been dissatisfied with something for a long time. There is a chance to get information and accurate access to customer requests. Let's start?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/323582/
All Articles