60% of employees are doing unproductive work. What’s the problem?

Thread Content

Many management systems have been tried, but ideal results have never been achieved. Please think carefully: is it common in your company for 5% to 10% of the employees to start working by looking for faults and opposing you, disapproving of all rules and having different opinions on every decision, without ever considering their own performance? ； 15% to 20% of the employees produce work that is of substandard quality ； 20% of the employees work without knowing what they are doing, and they have no idea whether what they do is right or wrong ； Only 20% of employees perform at a high level. In other words, 60% of the employees in the company are not delivering proper performance – what a huge waste! Despite the many efforts made by managers, despite having learned a great deal about management principles and trying out various management systems, we still fail to achieve the desired results. Where exactly is the problem? These are the findings from my 10-year longitudinal study of 200 companies. For over a decade, it has been these very questions that have deeply attracted me, keeping me fascinated by and interested in management – why do the same resources and people, when managed by different managers, yield such vastly different results? Why are so many people engaged in ineffective, or even meaningless, work? What are the key factors that affect people’s work? Why do people move around? Why do many people feel that the organization doesn’t allow them to contribute? The emergence of these problems actually stems from management concepts. Let performance speak: Management is only accountable for performance. Phenomenon 1: Merit and hard work. It is now widely understood that hard work does not contribute to performance. But in reality, many people feel that they have already done enough for the company after putting in a lot of effort. In fact, we can also accept these views; many companies still use hard work as the criterion for evaluation. This shows that the concept of management is still not clearly understood. Talking about hard work is the first waste in management. Phenomenon 2: Abilities and attitudes. Management is only responsible for performance; it is abilities, not attitudes, that directly lead to performance. Whoever generates performance is the most important. Attitudes are only useful when they turn into abilities. You might want to reflect on your own company: who are the employees who contribute to its success? Are it the capable people who die of exhaustion, while those who don’t work live well? And usually, capable people tend to have a less positive attitude, while those who are not capable always try to be pleasing. Then there must be something wrong with your management. Do you evaluate attitudes more, or abilities? If 50% of your evaluations focus on attitude, then the capable people in your company will naturally feel very stressed – and that means they will leave if they get the chance. This is the second biggest waste in management. Phenomenon 3: Talent and character. Character can only be evaluated when faced with major challenges; under normal circumstances, it’s difficult for us to determine whether a person’s character is good or bad. Management shouldn’t bet on this aspect; instead, it should strive to address it: The responsibility of management is to ensure that there are no opportunities for people to make mistakes, so that character can be transformed into talent and lead to performance. Therefore, to study management, one needs to look at economics and organizational behavior. When is \"virtue\" more important than \"talent\"? It must be noted that Derby only matters at two specific times. First, during recruitment ； One is during promotions. Rule of equal distribution: Management is a form of distribution; managers must know how to divide three elements into an equilateral triangle – that is, ensuring equality among power, responsibility, and interests. Almost all management problems arise from the imbalance among these three elements. Management is essentially a form of allocation; it should be noted that what is allocated here is responsibility, not power. The biggest mistake we make in management is delegating authority. It must be clear that the basis for power distribution is not positions, but responsibilities. For example: if the responsibility for achieving performance lies primarily with the branch office, then the person with the most power should be the branch manager. But in reality, it’s often not like that. I suggest everyone make two important observations: 1. Who does the company’s general manager often hold meetings with? The person who attends the meetings holds the most power; he often holds meetings with people from the headquarters’ functional departments, such as the human resources manager and the finance manager Do you still meet frequently with branch managers and frontline managers? Those who meet with the general manager frequently have the most authority to make decisions, though these decisions are implemented through the general manager. 2. In terms of the design of company titles, should the titles for front-line employees be higher, or those for the company’s functional departments? Titles carry symbolic meaning, and power is often allocated through the titles of positions. You’ll notice that in the General Manager’s meeting room, there are mostly people from functional departments; moreover, the titles of heads of secondary functional departments are higher than those of branch managers and frontline staff. How can you make a human resources director work for a mere frontline manager? The moment they meet and exchange greetings, there’s an immediate difference in their attitudes. Such an allocation is not based on responsibility, and thus management effectiveness is significantly compromised. 3. Management should always serve business operations – this is a view I have always held, and it is also the topic I discuss most often. It contains two important insights: First, what management does must be determined by the business operations ； Second, the management level cannot exceed the operational level. Understanding 1: Why should what management does be determined by the business operations? In a company, “running it” means choosing to do the right things ； Management is about doing things right. The logical relationship is very clear. For example, under normal circumstances, a low-margin, high-volume business model requires scale and cost management ； Quality corresponds to price in business operations, which is related to quality control and brand management ； Service-oriented operation corresponds to process management ； Customized operations correspond to flexible management, etc. Understanding 2: Why can management not exceed operations? Because if a company’s management ability exceeds its operational capability, it often leads to losses. This is why some companies have sound systems, advanced cultural philosophies, and excellent talent, yet still suffer from poor business performance. Although you are very good at management, your approach to it has problems. You might as well take a look to see whether the best people in your company are focused on operations or management Do you hold more internal meetings or external meetings? If your executive team holds internal meetings every time and sees only their subordinates on a daily basis, then management takes precedence over operations. This is why Jack Welch said: Poor managers spend the most important time in the morning on internal meetings, and use the less important time in the afternoon to meet with clients ； Good managers spend the most important time in the morning meeting with clients ； Hold internal meetings for as short a time as possible in the afternoon. From how you allocate your time, one can tell whether you’re more focused on operations or management. Source: Internet