Catch Me If You Can. Version of the Prophet
I am not the Prophet you may have thought of. I am the prophet that is not in my own country. In the popular game "catch me if you can" I do not play. I do not need to catch, I'm always at hand. I am always busy. I do not just work, perform duties and follow instructions, like most, but try to improve at least something around me.
Unfortunately, I am a man of the old school. I am sixty years old and I am an intellectual. Now, as in the last hundred years, this word sounds either as a curse or as an excuse for inaction, weak will and infantilism. But I have nothing to justify.
I am one of those people who hold our factory. But, as follows from the first sentences of my story, no one cares about this fact. More precisely, it was not. The other day, a certain King appeared in our area (he never gave his name, and it was very inconvenient to communicate). Yesterday he came to me. We talked for a long time - to be honest, I did not expect that this young man would be so educated, interesting and deep person. He explained to me that I am the Prophet.
')
At the end of the conversation, the King left me to read Jim Collins book “From Good to Great,” and recommended paying special attention to the chapter on the 5th-level leaders. To be honest, I am amused by these modern trends in inventing various ranks, steps, belts and other markings, but the King managed to interest me by saying that the book was written according to the results of serious research. Thanks to this book, I realized what I should become, but I will never become - the head of the company.
The book is simply and intelligibly explained, using the example of several foreign companies, how people with destiny, experience and worldview, like mine, achieve brilliant successes on the basis of enterprise management. A detailed description of the reasons why this is happening, and why a real manager should grow within the enterprise, and not be attracted from outside. Only a person who grew up in a company, who has traveled a long way with her - preferably, at the age of 15, understands and feels it, in the literal sense.
But, as you may guess, such a fate is not prepared for me - we live at the wrong time. Now is the time of “effective” managers. I have been watching this phenomenon for a long time, and I want to share a few thoughts on this matter. And, I hope, you will be convinced that the time now is exactly the same as it was always.
In factories, in posts at all levels, there were always three types of people. The classification is my own, so I apologize if it coincides or does not coincide with any of the existing ones, including - with your.
The first - who came just to work, such a majority. Workers, storekeepers, drivers, accountants, economists, suppliers, designers, technologists, etc. - almost all specialties. Many middle managers appointed after many years of good service are also of this type. Good, nice, honest people. But there is also a minus - they, by and large, are indifferent to the enterprise where they work. They would not want the company to collapse, or reduce staff, or start to introduce any changes, because they are waiting for a violation of the stability of life - the most unpleasant event for them.
The second - those who came to create, improve and move forward. It is to create, and not to create, to prepare to create, discuss, plan, or coordinate the creation of something. Silently, persistently, with a soul, not sparing time and effort. There are few such people. People of the second type sincerely love their enterprise, but what is interesting is that they do not improve because they love, but they love because they improve. They have a feedback system when you start loving what you care about. Also, dog breeders fall in love with each of their pet, because before his purchase no love is there, it appears in the process. People of the second type love their every job, every enterprise, and sincerely want, try and make it better.
Actually, these are the Prophets whom no one wants to notice. Wrongly put it - they notice, know, appreciate and love. People of the first type. And why they never stand at the helm, I think, is already clear. Because there are people like number three.
The third type is those who came to receive. In fact, another word fits in there, from the modern lexicon, but I will not go down to their level, and I will try to express my thought in a civilized Russian language. I hope you understand me.
People of the third type were always present at the enterprises, but they were called differently. In Soviet times, these were, as a rule, political workers, and children of other, more senior political workers. There was little harm from them, because they didn't have to do anything to ... It doesn't matter. They didn't have to do anything. They came to receive - and they received. Just because they are from caste.
In leadership positions involving real work, decision-making and responsibility, then there were people of either the first or second type. It was simply impossible to do otherwise — the planned economy worked. It is now, with poor management, the company may simply disappear, incl. physically, turning into a regular shopping center. In Soviet times, the plant could disappear only by order - as, for example, during the evacuation of 1941-42. It was a kind of self-defense system from poor management.
In the 90s there was a failure - people of the third type practically disappeared from the workshops. We can only mention the "brothers" - they also came to receive. But, as a rule, their visits were limited to high cabinets. Occasionally it came to us when two raider attacks took place. But, I repeat, they didn’t intervene in the case, only at the level of the plant’s overall working capacity (it was absent during the capture, for natural reasons).
The third type of people who now exist in almost all enterprises, you know - these are the most "effective" managers. They come to the factory to receive. But not just to receive - to receive within the framework of the “theme” I apologize, I could not find a decent and understandable synonym for this “topic”. The word itself is not bad, but the meaning that is invested in it does not hold water.
The meaning is simple: see the popular “topic”, read a couple (at best) of books on it, remember the first moves to introduce the “topic” (as Ostap Bender knew the first move of the chess game), and correctly “sell”. For each component there is a lot of information on the Internet, especially - on the "sale", as a universal, between the "thematic" practice.
"That" is full. The first, as I recall, the site creators came to us in the late nineties. Then this service was worth a lot of money, so the director did not make such investments.
Then there was automation, on early versions of the platform that is now popular. These guys have already managed to climb up to us, and the need, in general, was, especially in the area of ​​accounting.
Next came the certification of international standards of the ISO series. Perhaps nothing more unreasonable, and at the same time brilliant, I have never met in my life. You will understand the absurdity immediately if you think about the purpose of the system of standards: describe the typical processes of most enterprises. It is like developing a single GOST for all industries.
In principle, nothing is impossible - if you remove the details of a specific production, you get a kind of universal standard. But what will remain in it if we remove those very details of a specific production? “Work well, try, love your customers, pay bills on time and plan production”? So even in this formulation there are moments that are not relevant for several productions that I personally saw.
And what is the genius? In that, despite the objective unreasonableness of the idea, it was excellently sold. This standard was implemented by all manufacturing enterprises in Russia. The “theme” and the ability of people of the third type to sell it is so strong.
Around the middle of zero, according to my observations, there was a radical change that gave rise to these very "effective" managers. You noticed that, until now, the “themes” came to the plant from the outside - they were literally external companies, contractors with whom we entered into an agreement, worked together on something, and, one way or another, we parted. And in the middle of the zero, concrete people began to bud off from the contractors.
These particular people caught the "theme" - it makes no sense to sit in the contractor company, to perform the work under the contract, receiving a small piecework wage or a percentage of the amount. We must go where the whole amount is waiting - to the plant.
The first came implementers 1C. They lived for themselves, all the plants worked, and suddenly it turned out that no one can live without automation, and necessarily on 1C. Out of nowhere, there was a mass of specialists who perfectly understand business processes, who know how to choose the right solutions, but for some reason never achieve any meaningful result for the plant, and at the same time require huge sums of money for their work. Even now, a decent 1C programmer costs more than a good technologist, designer, and often a chief engineer, chief accountant, financial director, etc.
Then programmers suddenly, as if by magic, turned into CIOs. While we were sitting at the computer in our development environment, one could still argue about the benefits of their work — but at least they did something with their hands. Becoming a CIO, they stopped working altogether. To be honest, my personal opinion: the most "effective" managers are CIOs.
Followed by experts in the implementation of ISO. I myself saw how decent people, engineers who worked at our enterprise, once smelled this “topic”. It was literally so. The plant decided to obtain an ISO certificate - it was necessary to get some contacts from representative offices of foreign companies.
They invited a consultant, certified auditor. He came, taught, helped, got his money, but he also decided to make a brag, and told the engineers how much he earned. As I recall, it was about the sum of one thousand euros per day of work of the chief auditor at the on-site audit. It was about 2005, the euro cost forty rubles. Imagine what kind of fire burned in the eyes of engineers who received, God bless, memory, fifteen thousand rubles a month.
And all you need is to get an auditor certificate. Of course, field audits do not happen every day, but there is still no end of client, and there is a shortage of specialists - after all, few people have sensed the “topic”. And the engineers followed him. Five people left, two really became auditors - I'm not sure that they were in charge, but they were definitely in charge. True, they are now languishing somewhere in the QMS or the Quality Control Department.
There was a story with the ISO implementers, similar to the transformation of 1C programmers into CIOs - a quality director appeared in almost every factory. Or a former auditor, or a former consultant, or a former participant in the implementation of ISO by the customer. In any case - the person who sensed the "theme".
Any "themes", in my opinion, are very similar to each other. Their main feature is that no one can really explain why the plant needs them. Without slogans and attempts to sell themselves, and in the language of at least economics or elementary logic. Examples of successful growth of financial or economic indicators, clearly caused by automation or the introduction of a standard - units. And, as a rule, not from Russian practice, but from the founders of these practices, or at least their direct followers.
Sitting on the "topic" I watched not only from engineers and programmers. One familiar professor, at one time, also understood that something had to be changed, and he went to consultants. He is a really smart man, and from all popular topics he chose the Theory of Limitations of Goldratt Systems. He studied it thoroughly, according to all sources, studied the entire practice, became deeply absorbed and began to "sell" himself.
At first, it went very well - the “theme” worked and brought in income. But soon the “theme” was gone - and, according to the professor, this does not depend on the success of the application of this or that technique. Simply, there is a certain fashion created by those very "effective" managers. Now they sing TOC, then they stop and begin to promote something else - simpler in understanding and learning, more difficult to implement (in order to sit on the enterprise for a long time), and with more smeared, hidden and incomprehensible results.
Companies react to fashion, and stop ordering the same TOC, and ask for Scrum. The professor switched to this technique. Again, I studied it thoroughly - as befits a serious scientist. And the methodology itself, and those on which it is based. Now he had two instruments for sale in his briefcase.
But, surprisingly, everyone needs only the one that is heard. Literally this: a professor comes to the director, studies the problems, and says - you need TOC. No, the director answers, we need Scrum. The professor explains in detail, in figures, that TOC will bring a real increase in profits in specific areas, due to understandable actions. No, says the director, we want Scrum. Because there and there Scrum has already been introduced. The professor does not stand up, and offers to go all-in - to make the project for free, but to get a small share of the profit growth. No, the director answers, only Scrum.
The professor has no choice anymore - he cannot sell what will help clients. He sells what customers are asking, what's in fashion, what is promoted. Moreover, he is well aware that the essence of the same Scrum, as if to put it mildly ... Not that copied from some source. It completely repeats several techniques that existed in the Soviet Union.
For example, if anyone remembers, there were such worthy brigades. Exactly Scrum team (for example, an autonomous group of journalists described in the book of Jeff Sutherland in an autonomous region of Egypt). Almost completely autonomous brigade gets the task - to make so many details. For the released volume the foreman will receive money that he will distribute within the team at his discretion. Brigadier - elective office. How management is built from the inside is the business of the team itself, no one from the outside interferes. There are no methods, books, seminars, stand-ups, boards, and other tinsel - only those methods take root that help to achieve results faster. And it worked, in every factory, without “effective” managers and self-confident young guys from social networks, in bright T-shirts, with a beard for the whole face and good knowledge of foreign languages.
If you're interested, read Alexander Petrovich Prokhorov’s very interesting study entitled “The Russian Management Model”. This is a study - on each page at least one link to the source (articles in scientific journals, books, studies, biographies, memoirs). Unfortunately, these books are almost never written. A modern book on management, if it contains references, then only to previous books by the same author.
In general, it is very easy to distinguish the "effective" manager. He is like a sales assistant in an electronics store. Have you ever had it so - come to buy, for example, a phone or a laptop, you look closely, a consultant approaches, offers help. You ask - and which phone has a high-speed hard disk? What is he doing? That's right, starts reading labels with you. Or he gets a phone, opens the site (not the fact that his company), and searches there.
Compare, for example, with the seller of power tools on the market - the fact that he owns the shop for many years. We have this Sergey Ivanovich, on the radio market. He knows his goods inside and out. He will always exchange if something is broken, without checks and receipts. He will always come to the home buyer and show you how to use the device. He does not know anything about phones, televisions and computers, and does not pretend to know. I chose a path - a power tool, I studied it thoroughly, and it works. How many years the radio market works, so much is Sergei Ivanovich's shop. Yes, he does not have such a turn and profit, as in Leroy Merlin or Castorama. But I want to work with him, not with a consultant from the store. Because professionalism is still important, though leveled, to a large extent, by the domination of “efficient” managers.
We had a teacher at the institute who liked to make fun of students. How many years he has been working, he convinces everyone around him so much: you are the most incompetent students, and every year things get worse. His favorite joke: if you, the engineers, are sent to the factory for a bucket of tension, you will go! For the sake of interest, try to ask the consultant in the store - what is the dichotomous majorization of the matrix for this phone? Go find out what you think? I tried - he went. Because the Internet could not find.
“Themes” are changing, and there are more and more “effective” managers. I will be like my teacher, and I will say that even “effective” managers used to be better. Every year they are younger and, unfortunately, more inept. They even forgot to talk and discuss.
I'm not an old diehard who argues with everyone, just for the sake of argument. I really want to understand, try to apply, and get results from what they preach. But, alas, they themselves do not understand what they are selling. They are consulting boys from an electronics store.
I read books about all the techniques that are included in the list of "topics." Some of them I introduced in production, and they brought the result. For example, Kanban is not the one that suddenly became a software development management technique, but one that was designed by Taichi On at Toyota’s factories and served to accelerate the product life cycle by reducing inter-operational stocks. What do you think, when another “effective” manager came to us with the intention of introducing Kanban, what was our conversation about?
That I have to go to retire. The fact that Kanban evolved, and turned into ... Here the "effective" manager got a little confused, thought, but could not really explain what the good old Kanban turned into.Realizing that the conversation went in the wrong direction, the manager switched to aggression. He accused me of hindering progress, and was dragging the enterprise back into the stone age. He stopped talking to me - he switched to the director. You know how such strange conversations go - a person as if answers your question, but not to you, without mentioning you, and looking at another person. He no longer looked at me - only occasionally glanced.
This is a fairly characteristic feature of “effective” managers. Once I met an explanation of this behavior in the film, which my son advised me - “They smoke here”. The meaning is simple: it is a dispute, not a trade. The task is not to convince that he is right, but to convince that I am wrong. Moreover, not me, but others. Then the logic is simple: if I am wrong, then he is right. Oddly, it works perfectly.
It is enough to accuse me, or any other employee from the old guard, in inertia, conservatism, discouraging change, too close attention to trifles, as decision-makers immediately take the side of an “effective” manager. He understands that we, the people of the old school, are intelligent, and, unfortunately, are already quite expensive in their company, we simply will not stoop to its level and argue, accuse, justify, use cunning tricks. We just step aside and wait it out.
Because no “effective” manager at a manufacturing enterprise in the real sector of the economy will long be delayed. He himself does not need this - he came to skim the cream, and run away, until they realized that he was just another scam. We, the prophets, somehow manage to support and develop the enterprise in the intervals between "effective" managers. Although, to be honest, sometimes we just have time to lick the wounds.
Recently, another such flew, CIO. True, the same King hinted that there is not so simple. I do not like these secrets of the Madrid court, and therefore did not become interested in more. He wants to - he will tell. But no, nothing, and not such Kings waited.
He just brought another "topic." Yes, probably, she is something better than the previous ones. Perhaps it will benefit the enterprise. It is possible that this "theme" will take root. But it's all the same - just a “topic.” Fashion, migratory bird, plywood over Paris. And all these secrets, nicknames, cunning schemes of introduction to the plant, the director’s motivation for change are just attributes that help the King to “sell” himself.
Today I have an appointment with the King and the director. Apparently, there will again be a dispute for three. I will drink a couple of pills in advance, and try not to engage in meaningless arguments. Health is not the same.
Unfortunately, I am a man of the old school. I am sixty years old and I am an intellectual. Now, as in the last hundred years, this word sounds either as a curse or as an excuse for inaction, weak will and infantilism. But I have nothing to justify.
I am one of those people who hold our factory. But, as follows from the first sentences of my story, no one cares about this fact. More precisely, it was not. The other day, a certain King appeared in our area (he never gave his name, and it was very inconvenient to communicate). Yesterday he came to me. We talked for a long time - to be honest, I did not expect that this young man would be so educated, interesting and deep person. He explained to me that I am the Prophet.
')
At the end of the conversation, the King left me to read Jim Collins book “From Good to Great,” and recommended paying special attention to the chapter on the 5th-level leaders. To be honest, I am amused by these modern trends in inventing various ranks, steps, belts and other markings, but the King managed to interest me by saying that the book was written according to the results of serious research. Thanks to this book, I realized what I should become, but I will never become - the head of the company.
The book is simply and intelligibly explained, using the example of several foreign companies, how people with destiny, experience and worldview, like mine, achieve brilliant successes on the basis of enterprise management. A detailed description of the reasons why this is happening, and why a real manager should grow within the enterprise, and not be attracted from outside. Only a person who grew up in a company, who has traveled a long way with her - preferably, at the age of 15, understands and feels it, in the literal sense.
But, as you may guess, such a fate is not prepared for me - we live at the wrong time. Now is the time of “effective” managers. I have been watching this phenomenon for a long time, and I want to share a few thoughts on this matter. And, I hope, you will be convinced that the time now is exactly the same as it was always.
In factories, in posts at all levels, there were always three types of people. The classification is my own, so I apologize if it coincides or does not coincide with any of the existing ones, including - with your.
The first - who came just to work, such a majority. Workers, storekeepers, drivers, accountants, economists, suppliers, designers, technologists, etc. - almost all specialties. Many middle managers appointed after many years of good service are also of this type. Good, nice, honest people. But there is also a minus - they, by and large, are indifferent to the enterprise where they work. They would not want the company to collapse, or reduce staff, or start to introduce any changes, because they are waiting for a violation of the stability of life - the most unpleasant event for them.
The second - those who came to create, improve and move forward. It is to create, and not to create, to prepare to create, discuss, plan, or coordinate the creation of something. Silently, persistently, with a soul, not sparing time and effort. There are few such people. People of the second type sincerely love their enterprise, but what is interesting is that they do not improve because they love, but they love because they improve. They have a feedback system when you start loving what you care about. Also, dog breeders fall in love with each of their pet, because before his purchase no love is there, it appears in the process. People of the second type love their every job, every enterprise, and sincerely want, try and make it better.
Actually, these are the Prophets whom no one wants to notice. Wrongly put it - they notice, know, appreciate and love. People of the first type. And why they never stand at the helm, I think, is already clear. Because there are people like number three.
The third type is those who came to receive. In fact, another word fits in there, from the modern lexicon, but I will not go down to their level, and I will try to express my thought in a civilized Russian language. I hope you understand me.
People of the third type were always present at the enterprises, but they were called differently. In Soviet times, these were, as a rule, political workers, and children of other, more senior political workers. There was little harm from them, because they didn't have to do anything to ... It doesn't matter. They didn't have to do anything. They came to receive - and they received. Just because they are from caste.
In leadership positions involving real work, decision-making and responsibility, then there were people of either the first or second type. It was simply impossible to do otherwise — the planned economy worked. It is now, with poor management, the company may simply disappear, incl. physically, turning into a regular shopping center. In Soviet times, the plant could disappear only by order - as, for example, during the evacuation of 1941-42. It was a kind of self-defense system from poor management.
In the 90s there was a failure - people of the third type practically disappeared from the workshops. We can only mention the "brothers" - they also came to receive. But, as a rule, their visits were limited to high cabinets. Occasionally it came to us when two raider attacks took place. But, I repeat, they didn’t intervene in the case, only at the level of the plant’s overall working capacity (it was absent during the capture, for natural reasons).
The third type of people who now exist in almost all enterprises, you know - these are the most "effective" managers. They come to the factory to receive. But not just to receive - to receive within the framework of the “theme” I apologize, I could not find a decent and understandable synonym for this “topic”. The word itself is not bad, but the meaning that is invested in it does not hold water.
The meaning is simple: see the popular “topic”, read a couple (at best) of books on it, remember the first moves to introduce the “topic” (as Ostap Bender knew the first move of the chess game), and correctly “sell”. For each component there is a lot of information on the Internet, especially - on the "sale", as a universal, between the "thematic" practice.
"That" is full. The first, as I recall, the site creators came to us in the late nineties. Then this service was worth a lot of money, so the director did not make such investments.
Then there was automation, on early versions of the platform that is now popular. These guys have already managed to climb up to us, and the need, in general, was, especially in the area of ​​accounting.
Next came the certification of international standards of the ISO series. Perhaps nothing more unreasonable, and at the same time brilliant, I have never met in my life. You will understand the absurdity immediately if you think about the purpose of the system of standards: describe the typical processes of most enterprises. It is like developing a single GOST for all industries.
In principle, nothing is impossible - if you remove the details of a specific production, you get a kind of universal standard. But what will remain in it if we remove those very details of a specific production? “Work well, try, love your customers, pay bills on time and plan production”? So even in this formulation there are moments that are not relevant for several productions that I personally saw.
And what is the genius? In that, despite the objective unreasonableness of the idea, it was excellently sold. This standard was implemented by all manufacturing enterprises in Russia. The “theme” and the ability of people of the third type to sell it is so strong.
Around the middle of zero, according to my observations, there was a radical change that gave rise to these very "effective" managers. You noticed that, until now, the “themes” came to the plant from the outside - they were literally external companies, contractors with whom we entered into an agreement, worked together on something, and, one way or another, we parted. And in the middle of the zero, concrete people began to bud off from the contractors.
These particular people caught the "theme" - it makes no sense to sit in the contractor company, to perform the work under the contract, receiving a small piecework wage or a percentage of the amount. We must go where the whole amount is waiting - to the plant.
The first came implementers 1C. They lived for themselves, all the plants worked, and suddenly it turned out that no one can live without automation, and necessarily on 1C. Out of nowhere, there was a mass of specialists who perfectly understand business processes, who know how to choose the right solutions, but for some reason never achieve any meaningful result for the plant, and at the same time require huge sums of money for their work. Even now, a decent 1C programmer costs more than a good technologist, designer, and often a chief engineer, chief accountant, financial director, etc.
Then programmers suddenly, as if by magic, turned into CIOs. While we were sitting at the computer in our development environment, one could still argue about the benefits of their work — but at least they did something with their hands. Becoming a CIO, they stopped working altogether. To be honest, my personal opinion: the most "effective" managers are CIOs.
Followed by experts in the implementation of ISO. I myself saw how decent people, engineers who worked at our enterprise, once smelled this “topic”. It was literally so. The plant decided to obtain an ISO certificate - it was necessary to get some contacts from representative offices of foreign companies.
They invited a consultant, certified auditor. He came, taught, helped, got his money, but he also decided to make a brag, and told the engineers how much he earned. As I recall, it was about the sum of one thousand euros per day of work of the chief auditor at the on-site audit. It was about 2005, the euro cost forty rubles. Imagine what kind of fire burned in the eyes of engineers who received, God bless, memory, fifteen thousand rubles a month.
And all you need is to get an auditor certificate. Of course, field audits do not happen every day, but there is still no end of client, and there is a shortage of specialists - after all, few people have sensed the “topic”. And the engineers followed him. Five people left, two really became auditors - I'm not sure that they were in charge, but they were definitely in charge. True, they are now languishing somewhere in the QMS or the Quality Control Department.
There was a story with the ISO implementers, similar to the transformation of 1C programmers into CIOs - a quality director appeared in almost every factory. Or a former auditor, or a former consultant, or a former participant in the implementation of ISO by the customer. In any case - the person who sensed the "theme".
Any "themes", in my opinion, are very similar to each other. Their main feature is that no one can really explain why the plant needs them. Without slogans and attempts to sell themselves, and in the language of at least economics or elementary logic. Examples of successful growth of financial or economic indicators, clearly caused by automation or the introduction of a standard - units. And, as a rule, not from Russian practice, but from the founders of these practices, or at least their direct followers.
Sitting on the "topic" I watched not only from engineers and programmers. One familiar professor, at one time, also understood that something had to be changed, and he went to consultants. He is a really smart man, and from all popular topics he chose the Theory of Limitations of Goldratt Systems. He studied it thoroughly, according to all sources, studied the entire practice, became deeply absorbed and began to "sell" himself.
At first, it went very well - the “theme” worked and brought in income. But soon the “theme” was gone - and, according to the professor, this does not depend on the success of the application of this or that technique. Simply, there is a certain fashion created by those very "effective" managers. Now they sing TOC, then they stop and begin to promote something else - simpler in understanding and learning, more difficult to implement (in order to sit on the enterprise for a long time), and with more smeared, hidden and incomprehensible results.
Companies react to fashion, and stop ordering the same TOC, and ask for Scrum. The professor switched to this technique. Again, I studied it thoroughly - as befits a serious scientist. And the methodology itself, and those on which it is based. Now he had two instruments for sale in his briefcase.
But, surprisingly, everyone needs only the one that is heard. Literally this: a professor comes to the director, studies the problems, and says - you need TOC. No, the director answers, we need Scrum. The professor explains in detail, in figures, that TOC will bring a real increase in profits in specific areas, due to understandable actions. No, says the director, we want Scrum. Because there and there Scrum has already been introduced. The professor does not stand up, and offers to go all-in - to make the project for free, but to get a small share of the profit growth. No, the director answers, only Scrum.
The professor has no choice anymore - he cannot sell what will help clients. He sells what customers are asking, what's in fashion, what is promoted. Moreover, he is well aware that the essence of the same Scrum, as if to put it mildly ... Not that copied from some source. It completely repeats several techniques that existed in the Soviet Union.
For example, if anyone remembers, there were such worthy brigades. Exactly Scrum team (for example, an autonomous group of journalists described in the book of Jeff Sutherland in an autonomous region of Egypt). Almost completely autonomous brigade gets the task - to make so many details. For the released volume the foreman will receive money that he will distribute within the team at his discretion. Brigadier - elective office. How management is built from the inside is the business of the team itself, no one from the outside interferes. There are no methods, books, seminars, stand-ups, boards, and other tinsel - only those methods take root that help to achieve results faster. And it worked, in every factory, without “effective” managers and self-confident young guys from social networks, in bright T-shirts, with a beard for the whole face and good knowledge of foreign languages.
If you're interested, read Alexander Petrovich Prokhorov’s very interesting study entitled “The Russian Management Model”. This is a study - on each page at least one link to the source (articles in scientific journals, books, studies, biographies, memoirs). Unfortunately, these books are almost never written. A modern book on management, if it contains references, then only to previous books by the same author.
In general, it is very easy to distinguish the "effective" manager. He is like a sales assistant in an electronics store. Have you ever had it so - come to buy, for example, a phone or a laptop, you look closely, a consultant approaches, offers help. You ask - and which phone has a high-speed hard disk? What is he doing? That's right, starts reading labels with you. Or he gets a phone, opens the site (not the fact that his company), and searches there.
Compare, for example, with the seller of power tools on the market - the fact that he owns the shop for many years. We have this Sergey Ivanovich, on the radio market. He knows his goods inside and out. He will always exchange if something is broken, without checks and receipts. He will always come to the home buyer and show you how to use the device. He does not know anything about phones, televisions and computers, and does not pretend to know. I chose a path - a power tool, I studied it thoroughly, and it works. How many years the radio market works, so much is Sergei Ivanovich's shop. Yes, he does not have such a turn and profit, as in Leroy Merlin or Castorama. But I want to work with him, not with a consultant from the store. Because professionalism is still important, though leveled, to a large extent, by the domination of “efficient” managers.
We had a teacher at the institute who liked to make fun of students. How many years he has been working, he convinces everyone around him so much: you are the most incompetent students, and every year things get worse. His favorite joke: if you, the engineers, are sent to the factory for a bucket of tension, you will go! For the sake of interest, try to ask the consultant in the store - what is the dichotomous majorization of the matrix for this phone? Go find out what you think? I tried - he went. Because the Internet could not find.
“Themes” are changing, and there are more and more “effective” managers. I will be like my teacher, and I will say that even “effective” managers used to be better. Every year they are younger and, unfortunately, more inept. They even forgot to talk and discuss.
I'm not an old diehard who argues with everyone, just for the sake of argument. I really want to understand, try to apply, and get results from what they preach. But, alas, they themselves do not understand what they are selling. They are consulting boys from an electronics store.
I read books about all the techniques that are included in the list of "topics." Some of them I introduced in production, and they brought the result. For example, Kanban is not the one that suddenly became a software development management technique, but one that was designed by Taichi On at Toyota’s factories and served to accelerate the product life cycle by reducing inter-operational stocks. What do you think, when another “effective” manager came to us with the intention of introducing Kanban, what was our conversation about?
That I have to go to retire. The fact that Kanban evolved, and turned into ... Here the "effective" manager got a little confused, thought, but could not really explain what the good old Kanban turned into.Realizing that the conversation went in the wrong direction, the manager switched to aggression. He accused me of hindering progress, and was dragging the enterprise back into the stone age. He stopped talking to me - he switched to the director. You know how such strange conversations go - a person as if answers your question, but not to you, without mentioning you, and looking at another person. He no longer looked at me - only occasionally glanced.
This is a fairly characteristic feature of “effective” managers. Once I met an explanation of this behavior in the film, which my son advised me - “They smoke here”. The meaning is simple: it is a dispute, not a trade. The task is not to convince that he is right, but to convince that I am wrong. Moreover, not me, but others. Then the logic is simple: if I am wrong, then he is right. Oddly, it works perfectly.
It is enough to accuse me, or any other employee from the old guard, in inertia, conservatism, discouraging change, too close attention to trifles, as decision-makers immediately take the side of an “effective” manager. He understands that we, the people of the old school, are intelligent, and, unfortunately, are already quite expensive in their company, we simply will not stoop to its level and argue, accuse, justify, use cunning tricks. We just step aside and wait it out.
Because no “effective” manager at a manufacturing enterprise in the real sector of the economy will long be delayed. He himself does not need this - he came to skim the cream, and run away, until they realized that he was just another scam. We, the prophets, somehow manage to support and develop the enterprise in the intervals between "effective" managers. Although, to be honest, sometimes we just have time to lick the wounds.
Recently, another such flew, CIO. True, the same King hinted that there is not so simple. I do not like these secrets of the Madrid court, and therefore did not become interested in more. He wants to - he will tell. But no, nothing, and not such Kings waited.
He just brought another "topic." Yes, probably, she is something better than the previous ones. Perhaps it will benefit the enterprise. It is possible that this "theme" will take root. But it's all the same - just a “topic.” Fashion, migratory bird, plywood over Paris. And all these secrets, nicknames, cunning schemes of introduction to the plant, the director’s motivation for change are just attributes that help the King to “sell” himself.
Today I have an appointment with the King and the director. Apparently, there will again be a dispute for three. I will drink a couple of pills in advance, and try not to engage in meaningless arguments. Health is not the same.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/457638/
All Articles