We send routine and bureaucracy into the past or how large and medium-sized enterprises stay on top of the iceberg
Quite often it happens that with the growth of the enterprise turns from dynamically developing to slowly decaying. The company is overgrown with formalism and a marshy smell is exhausted from it and seems to be a noble goal - to save external or internal threats from malicious intent, but as a result the company is overgrown with a set of orders that it’s quite problematic to understand, I’m not talking about doing it anymore. That is, on the one hand, the market dictates the conditions in which it is necessary to simplify the life of the consumer, on the other hand, the protection of the enterprise must withstand the evils of the environment. And how to be here?
How to make the company constantly developed dynamically, and employees receive adequate payment in accordance with their labor investments? How to deal with the problem of uneven load on employees of the enterprise, different efficiency of subordinates of the same rank with the same pay? Who wants his work to be fundamentally creative? If you are a manager, are you ready to spend your precious time in large numbers before launching the UBPS (Management Bonus and Process System) in order to get a powerful acceleration of the development of the enterprise and an increase in profits?
1. The head does not know the specific goal, what he wants from the company, from the employees, what will be the result of the goal. In my subjective assessment, less than 10% of managers “can”, and the rest say what specifically needs to be done or how they should be done, or they do it themselves and end up with what they don’t want. If you want to check whether there is a goal in your enterprise - conduct an experiment: let an outsider ask 5 different people from different departments in your enterprise what the company does and what is most important in your enterprise. If there are no matching answers - the conclusion is obvious. If the subordinates do not know the purpose, we will assume that there is no purpose (ask the sailors on the ship where they go). Just imagine that there are several people in the boat and everyone has his own paddle, if all of them do not agree where to go, then where will they be in time?
2. At the enterprise there is not and will not be a process approach in management, i.e. the enterprise as a whole must be covered from top to bottom. It should be clear who, what, when and why does the narrative on paper. Where is the entrance and what we have at the entrance and where is the exit and what should be at the exit. The implementation of the process is individual and it doesn’t matter how you do it - through work instructions or through Process Maps. These processes should be lively, transparent, understandable and as simple as possible (the latter is very important!). If these processes are drawn in the form of a block diagram, connecting all the processes together - then we end up with a subject area for negotiations within the enterprise. It becomes much easier to understand each other.
')
A classic situation, there is a problem that is understandable at the level of a specialist, but in the area of ​​the decision-making center, the manager has a problem smeared so much in the description process that it is not always clear what the matter is. And they begin to make decisions that are not aimed at the cause.
Another example is that a new employee comes in and is told that you need to familiarize yourself with these Talmuds of all orders and instructions, which often leads to the fact that a person usually throws this case and tries to get basic information on oral-verbal level from others. , makes mistakes and eventually, through trial and error, in half a year - a year becomes an expert, although in the process approach in a month it will be one.
Or, for example, the documents described and approved for certification, ISO, GOST, etc., or for satisfying the thirst of “big boss” documents, can bring much more sense if they are processually described, because what they are on paper is good, but when they are in fact used it is a completely different matter. Better is one small simple process, which is working, than large-scale detailed and existing in this form only on paper. If we have the simplest and most understandable mechanism, the participants in the process will understand each other more quickly and clearly. By analogy with the sailors on the ship - imagine that each rowing on your own, when it pleases.
3. The manager does not have and will not have time to engage in this process. There is no involvement, there is no control over the results - accordingly there is no result either.
4. The head did not set up feedback with subordinates in such a way that he does not know about the problems and the problem is not eliminated until the disaster. If a company is set up to solve problems only from the top down, according to the type there is an order - follow, then often the company will be forced to engage in extinguishing fires instead of preventing them.
We define:
1. Award Fund. Both the owner and the staff should be profitable for the profit to grow. In the collective agreement with the staff, you can describe the transparent rules of the game, that the bonus fund is directly tied to the company's profits in such a size and is calculated this way, and daily or weekly show where we are now. And here we are striving for a golden middle. The indicator should be interesting to both the owner and the staff; otherwise, a ship excessively leaning on one of the sides may not last long.
2. The rules for the distribution of bonuses. This is where the fun begins. I would rather explain with a very simplified example.
You are the owner of the wholesale company and in your company 10 people: 5 in sales, 3 in purchases and 2 in administration. You considered by joint efforts that all the work currently can be estimated at 100 bonuses. Of these, 50 bonuses - on sales, 30 - on the purchase and 20 on the administration. Let's say we distributed these bonuses equally on each of 10 bonuses per person. Then if the bonus fund this month amounted to 1 million, then each employee will receive 100 thousand bonus (1 million / 100 bonuses x 10 bonuses).
For the next quarter, the owner sets a goal to improve after sales service to clients, so that the percentage of repeat orders from our clients will increase from 5% to 20%. We decided to give 5 bonuses for this purpose. There was a discussion, there were willing and responsible. Responsible was 1 person from sales in a team of 3 people (1 person from the administration and 1 person from procurement). These 3 people described the process. At the meeting, they approved (defended) the process and distributed 5 bonuses according to their roles.
A month has passed. The share of repeat orders increased from 5% to 10%, but customer loyalty generally improved as a result of the survey. Since the goal was not fully achieved, the achievement of the goal was estimated at 3 bonuses out of 5 max. Profit increased to 1.16 million. At the meeting for the month, the manager distributed another 1 point to an employee from sales for innovation and one point to an employee from the administration for eliminating a possible penalty from the supervisory authority.
Result: one bonus in the new month = about 11 thousand rubles. (1.16 million / 105 bonuses) and in general, everyone won, especially those participating in the new process. So who, who could and wanted to take on the burden, received a reward for it. Over time, the number of bonuses will increase, and those who do not want to do anything new will receive on average the same salary, or even less, and leading experts will increase their income and the company as a whole.
In addition, the following tasks are achieved:
How to make the company constantly developed dynamically, and employees receive adequate payment in accordance with their labor investments? How to deal with the problem of uneven load on employees of the enterprise, different efficiency of subordinates of the same rank with the same pay? Who wants his work to be fundamentally creative? If you are a manager, are you ready to spend your precious time in large numbers before launching the UBPS (Management Bonus and Process System) in order to get a powerful acceleration of the development of the enterprise and an increase in profits?
I'll tell you right away when the result will be close to 0
1. The head does not know the specific goal, what he wants from the company, from the employees, what will be the result of the goal. In my subjective assessment, less than 10% of managers “can”, and the rest say what specifically needs to be done or how they should be done, or they do it themselves and end up with what they don’t want. If you want to check whether there is a goal in your enterprise - conduct an experiment: let an outsider ask 5 different people from different departments in your enterprise what the company does and what is most important in your enterprise. If there are no matching answers - the conclusion is obvious. If the subordinates do not know the purpose, we will assume that there is no purpose (ask the sailors on the ship where they go). Just imagine that there are several people in the boat and everyone has his own paddle, if all of them do not agree where to go, then where will they be in time?
2. At the enterprise there is not and will not be a process approach in management, i.e. the enterprise as a whole must be covered from top to bottom. It should be clear who, what, when and why does the narrative on paper. Where is the entrance and what we have at the entrance and where is the exit and what should be at the exit. The implementation of the process is individual and it doesn’t matter how you do it - through work instructions or through Process Maps. These processes should be lively, transparent, understandable and as simple as possible (the latter is very important!). If these processes are drawn in the form of a block diagram, connecting all the processes together - then we end up with a subject area for negotiations within the enterprise. It becomes much easier to understand each other.
')
A classic situation, there is a problem that is understandable at the level of a specialist, but in the area of ​​the decision-making center, the manager has a problem smeared so much in the description process that it is not always clear what the matter is. And they begin to make decisions that are not aimed at the cause.
Another example is that a new employee comes in and is told that you need to familiarize yourself with these Talmuds of all orders and instructions, which often leads to the fact that a person usually throws this case and tries to get basic information on oral-verbal level from others. , makes mistakes and eventually, through trial and error, in half a year - a year becomes an expert, although in the process approach in a month it will be one.
Or, for example, the documents described and approved for certification, ISO, GOST, etc., or for satisfying the thirst of “big boss” documents, can bring much more sense if they are processually described, because what they are on paper is good, but when they are in fact used it is a completely different matter. Better is one small simple process, which is working, than large-scale detailed and existing in this form only on paper. If we have the simplest and most understandable mechanism, the participants in the process will understand each other more quickly and clearly. By analogy with the sailors on the ship - imagine that each rowing on your own, when it pleases.
3. The manager does not have and will not have time to engage in this process. There is no involvement, there is no control over the results - accordingly there is no result either.
4. The head did not set up feedback with subordinates in such a way that he does not know about the problems and the problem is not eliminated until the disaster. If a company is set up to solve problems only from the top down, according to the type there is an order - follow, then often the company will be forced to engage in extinguishing fires instead of preventing them.
Well, let's get started. UBPS concept
We define:
1. Award Fund. Both the owner and the staff should be profitable for the profit to grow. In the collective agreement with the staff, you can describe the transparent rules of the game, that the bonus fund is directly tied to the company's profits in such a size and is calculated this way, and daily or weekly show where we are now. And here we are striving for a golden middle. The indicator should be interesting to both the owner and the staff; otherwise, a ship excessively leaning on one of the sides may not last long.
2. The rules for the distribution of bonuses. This is where the fun begins. I would rather explain with a very simplified example.
You are the owner of the wholesale company and in your company 10 people: 5 in sales, 3 in purchases and 2 in administration. You considered by joint efforts that all the work currently can be estimated at 100 bonuses. Of these, 50 bonuses - on sales, 30 - on the purchase and 20 on the administration. Let's say we distributed these bonuses equally on each of 10 bonuses per person. Then if the bonus fund this month amounted to 1 million, then each employee will receive 100 thousand bonus (1 million / 100 bonuses x 10 bonuses).
For the next quarter, the owner sets a goal to improve after sales service to clients, so that the percentage of repeat orders from our clients will increase from 5% to 20%. We decided to give 5 bonuses for this purpose. There was a discussion, there were willing and responsible. Responsible was 1 person from sales in a team of 3 people (1 person from the administration and 1 person from procurement). These 3 people described the process. At the meeting, they approved (defended) the process and distributed 5 bonuses according to their roles.
A month has passed. The share of repeat orders increased from 5% to 10%, but customer loyalty generally improved as a result of the survey. Since the goal was not fully achieved, the achievement of the goal was estimated at 3 bonuses out of 5 max. Profit increased to 1.16 million. At the meeting for the month, the manager distributed another 1 point to an employee from sales for innovation and one point to an employee from the administration for eliminating a possible penalty from the supervisory authority.
Result: one bonus in the new month = about 11 thousand rubles. (1.16 million / 105 bonuses) and in general, everyone won, especially those participating in the new process. So who, who could and wanted to take on the burden, received a reward for it. Over time, the number of bonuses will increase, and those who do not want to do anything new will receive on average the same salary, or even less, and leading experts will increase their income and the company as a whole.
In addition, the following tasks are achieved:
- the work of all employees in conjunction to achieve the goal, we are fighting for an increase in the whole pie, and not just for your piece;
- pulling out and using hidden resources of employees, using the initiative of one for the benefit of all;
- human-oriented approach, valuable frames will provide a permanent drive, laid in the right direction.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/334116/
All Articles