Workplace Debate Episode 55: Should the choice of outstanding employees be based on the instructions of superiors?
Thread Content
Speaking of the company’s selection of outstanding employees, it’s been full of twists and turns over the years! 1. All candidates who consider themselves qualified are required to submit applications, and each department must have at least 1 application ； Of course, with the selection process, many didn’t make it. 2. Department supervisors are required to initially screen out qualified candidates and then have them submit their applications; yet many still do not get selected. 3. After the department seeks opinions and a candidate is selected, it should be 100% approved, right? Wrong, the department gives its approval; the manager needs to conduct a selection process before deciding on the candidate. Alright, let’s start writing the report. But with this report reaching the manager’s superior, someone else takes over. What to do? The selection has been completed and the report has been submitted; simply because someone is capable of doing the work, but lacks social skills and has no reputation in other departments, they are to be replaced.
Any evaluation is based on fairness, openness, and impartiality. If we insist on holding evaluations, then what’s the point! At the grassroots level, it is necessary to establish clear quantitative criteria for evaluation! The higher levels must respect the opinions of the lower levels!
How to ensure fairness, impartiality, and transparency? The candidates might not even be known to the higher-level leaders, so how can they be selected? So, I’ve given up on the voting; it’s pointless. Even if you say it, if you’re not the person the leader has in mind, you’ll be criticized ； That’s right; if a higher-level leader doesn’t approve it, it’s just empty joy.
Normally, the higher-ups allocate a certain number of spots for outstanding employees to each department; the departments then conduct internal selections and submit the candidates to the higher-ups. The higher-ups should not reject or change these decisions, regardless of whether the employees are well-known or not. After all, the higher-ups may not be aware of all aspects of an employee’s performance at work, so it is important to respect the opinions of the department heads. If there is a leader who insists on making decisions unilaterally, the department head should communicate with that leader before conducting the selection process. Once the selection is complete, it must meet the established criteria, while also trying to take the leader’s feelings into account. This is a strategy for middle-level managers to navigate difficult situations; after all, it is necessary to first secure one’s own position before being able to advocate for others’ interests.
Sister Qingfeng, that’s exactly it. After the quotas are set, a preliminary screening of candidates is carried out; without the employees’ knowledge, managers hold meetings and supervisors make nominations. Then the manager decided on the candidate on the spot (everyone was upset before, as no one wrote anything). Finally, it is reported to the higher-level management for final confirmation.
Among the employees of our established company, there is a common saying: When choosing model workers, it’s just a way to make fools work harder; therefore, model workers should be those who are willing to work hard without stopping to look around. They definitely shouldn’t be those who spend their time hanging around with managers and taking advantage of small opportunities. So, to be a good leader, one must strike a balance among these people.
From a *practical perspective, the people have sharp eyes. What can you see from up there? Besides, since you’ve already made your decision, what’s the point of holding an election? You won’t even have anything to do in your free time
Anyway, our selection process is really weird. Those who are selected as winners get a raise in salary; as for bonuses, there’s still several thousand yuan available. Those who regularly attend meetings will surely be noticed by the leadership, and party members also have activities almost every year. So, the leader surely knows many people within the company, but it’s not certain that they will get along well. A deeper understanding, needless to say. Good news stays close, while bad news spreads far. No matter how much you do, it’s not as good as making one mistake. Flattery – well, it’s hard to say.
Even if it’s an open audition, once it gets to the management, isn’t it already a guaranteed appointment? Since it’s already decided, it’s better to make an official decision right away, so no one will have anything to say. But now, even those who were initially chosen end up not getting the position and someone else takes their place; sigh~
If it’s already decided, then what’s the point of going through all this hassle? The middle management should be able to handle it. Either you choose yourself, or I choose someone; but if you disagree even after that, are you trying to mess with me?
They think of me while working, but they don’t even know who I am when it comes to award evaluations? Means it has never been rated: L