“\"I can do the job without anyone.\" What is causing corporate leaders to be so indifferent toward talent – the systems, or too many talents?
Thread Content
As the title suggests, we know that the quality of a company can be assessed from various aspects, such as economic and technical indicators, production costs, profitability, the level of standardization in operations, the efficiency of management and the simplification of processes, as well as the morale of employees. Yet all these factors are related to the behavior of employees, and ultimately they stem from the effective use of talent and human resources. Many petrochemical companies advocate strategies such as retaining employees through career development opportunities, better benefits, or strong interpersonal relationships, in order to enhance their sense of belonging. However, this year many petrochemical companies have seen employees leave; those who do so are usually those who have made significant contributions to the company, or at least those who have worked hard there. They can get at least double the salary in other companies. Yet the company leaders claim in meetings that it doesn’t matter who leaves – anyone can take on their tasks, and those who are dissatisfied with the company or its compensation can simply leave... They even encourage older employees to retire early, middle-aged employees to take time off without pay, and younger employees to start their own businesses. What is causing company leaders to be so indifferent to employees’ decisions to leave? What causes one to do the same things no matter who is around? (Why can’t one do a good job without anyone else?) What gives the leader the confidence to say such things? Didn’t the company he owned go bankrupt, so he went to work in another place? Manager Discussion Group
There are many people in need of employment, making it easy to find workers
That’s how things really are; we rarely see our companies go bankrupt because of someone leaving.
Talent is key, but it’s also important to remember that everything still needs to be done without them.
This type of corporate leader views themselves as officials, without truly considering how to improve, expand, and strengthen the company; their only concern is how to make money and gain power.
This post was last edited by qugd on 2017-9-7 10:37. It can’t be generalized either. The primary factor for a company’s development is making profits, while long-term growth is achieved through factors such as the market, technology, management, quality, and of course, talent. But what is talent? In my opinion, the true talent for a company are those who have the ability to work toward its long-term development, including those with technical skills, those skilled in business operations, managers, and those who do solid work at the grassroots level. It’s like an army going to war: a marshal is needed, generals are needed, and soldiers are also needed. Cooks, stablehands, flag bearers, trumpeters, tent makers, and those who sharpen weapons are all necessary as well. Talent does not refer to elites alone, but rather to all those who can contribute to a company. Do not view talents in a one-dimensional or selectively focused manner, because a company is not an organization made up of such targeted talents; it is a complex whole. Although the extent of their contributions may vary, I don’t think the difference in their importance is that significant. I personally detest those who like to portray their own companies as being in a terrible state – why don’t you leave right away, start your own business, go abroad, or find a company that values talents like yours? It’s not impossible for there to be parasites within a company, but I believe those who complain all day long without doing their job properly are the pests or parasites of the company, as they disrupt the normal functioning of certain groups or departments within it. The statement that one can get by without anyone is absolutely true; in a company, those who always feel they can’t function without someone else should be asked to leave as soon as possible. Such people tend to think that their efforts outweigh what they receive in return, while the talents truly valued by a company are those who are capable and willing to work diligently. It’s impossible for treatment to be fair to everyone, but if a company’s leadership cannot win over the majority of its employees, that is, if the distribution of benefits isn’t reasonable overall, the company cannot function properly. Those individuals who feel they are exceptionally outstanding would do well to leave, so as not to cause discomfort among others.
It is caused by the differences between management concepts and corporate culture.
The operation of a company, especially larger and medium-sized ones, requires attention to its development. If you are just a worker at the grassroots level or a manager who oversees tasks, it may be difficult for you to understand the development needs of the company over three years, five years, or even more than a decade, as this involves considering various factors, making predictions, and taking preparations. Chinese companies can no longer rely on a workshop-style approach to development; modern companies that lack a vision for growth will soon face failure. For industrial enterprises, especially those in the chemical sector, if they are unable to anticipate market trends and developments over the next few years, they can only react passively. Although talent is a factor in competition, one must understand what talent entails in order to assess it properly. It’s no problem for a company to lose certain employees, including some talented ones, but without its top decision-makers, the company can fall into chaos within just a few days. So, from another perspective, a company can’t function without its owner, but it can function without any of its employees.
“\"I can do anything without anyone else\" is just as a false proposition as \"I can survive on anything.\" If one can survive by eating anything, then isn’t there any need to pay attention to whether food is balanced in terms of yin and yang, whether it’s healthy, or whether it offers good value for money? The utilization of talent requires more attention to pairing, in order to retain key talents with high cost-effectiveness. When beef-type talents leave, replacing them with taro-type talents can still yield good results; as for how effective it is, that can be determined through practical experience. Talents of the beef type can generate a profit of one million, while those of the taro type may cause losses of hundreds of thousands due to shortcomings in their abilities. In the talent business, one must be able to do the calculations properly before claiming that \"anything can be done without anyone.\" Otherwise, one is the most useless talent of all