Case study of managing workplace

I don't analyze it from a professional perspective, but only from a practical perspective:

(1) Although W Company is a private enterprise, it was not founded by a family, but its business line before recruiting a deputy general manager was obviously a family-owned enterprise. Compared with other types of enterprises, family-owned enterprises have many advantages, but when their scale expands, they will encounter many bottlenecks. Deal with it, step into the sky, such as Wal-Mart; If it is not handled properly, it may disappear from now on. The rise and fall of a family business is often related to the rise and fall of the family. In the same way, the rise and fall of W company is also related to their next generation of work groups.

The boss of W Company wants to take this opportunity to recruit a deputy general manager, introduce advanced management mechanism and transform his company into an ordinary share responsibility system or a competency-based company. However, at this time, people who have the ability, no connections and no background will feel lonely in this company, not because what he said is not good, but because here he will feel that everyone else is a group and only the deputy general manager is a person. Everyone will say at work: work is work, and I come to work not to live, not to make friends. But imagine that if you don't communicate with employees at work, you make plans and employees implement them, you will find that you can't hear the feedback of your decision for a long time, and you will feel isolated because you are outside the circle of employees.

If the deputy general manager stays in this position, there are only two possibilities:

1, trying to integrate into the organization, but he is a newcomer. It is bound to be difficult for a person without prestige in the circle to come to such a high administrative level, so unless he has extremely outstanding personality charm, it is basically impossible;

2. Leave your job.

I think the deputy general manager also feels the pressure at work, and the future development space is limited. He is in a high position, but he can't hear the following voice for a long time, that is, he is divorced from the masses and the company can't see the market changes. In the long run, people will become less and less sensitive.

Therefore, the deputy general manager is an excellent person, a person who knows how to grasp his future, but not a person who dares to challenge and strives to challenge, so he left.

(2) The seniority system is very foreign, but it is actually an employee management system that considers the key factors of promotion according to the length of time employees stay in the company; Competency system has many names, and the theme of judgment is the role played by employees in the company.

Therefore, a theme of the two systems lies in the evaluation and grasp of employee loyalty; One theme is to evaluate and grasp the value of employees.

Since it is the company's system, it is to realize the company's sustainable profit. But the former focuses on the word "sustainable"; The latter focuses on the word "ability".

It is clear that the connection between the two is: both are to realize the company's income generation. The difference between the two lies in the different emphasis.

Different emphasis will inevitably lead to different scope of use, that is to say, different companies should choose the most suitable assessment system according to their actual situation. It's not that any system is better or worse, but that this system has its own space and is more suitable for you.

Personally, I think:

1, a small start-up enterprise, the selection ability system is more reliable. The reason is that brain drain is inevitable at this time. We are mainly looking for new employees to play their role in promoting the development of the company. At this time, the company's values and cultural concepts are in a shaping stage. In other words, living is the last word. Only when the company survives can we talk about culture, values and contribution to society. Of course, there are counterexamples. In the case, W Company is an obvious counterexample, and Warner Bros. is also an obvious counterexample.

2. For companies with scale and mature values, such as China Mobile, we should pay more attention to the issue of loyalty when investigating employees' behavior. Why? Because we can give you training when you have problems with your ability. When your ability is good, it doesn't mean that you can continue to play your value in my company. If your loyalty is not high enough, I will put you in an important position because of your outstanding ability. Then when you master certain company secrets, you will leave your job and the company will suffer losses. At the same time, even if your ability is not high enough, your loyalty is high. If I put you in an important position, at least you won't be influenced by employees.

3. There are still some companies that should always adhere to the competency-based system, that is, industries with fierce competition and very unstable industry environment. For example: IT market. This industry is famous for its high turnover rate. Why? Are employees in this industry generally low in loyalty? No. It is this industry that needs innovation and innovative talents. If enterprises want to maintain continuous innovation and make innovation the main force of their own survival, they must constantly input fresh blood, otherwise they can only sit still.

The last sentence: shopping malls are like battlefields, and there is no fixed number. The three items I analyzed above are only a summary of the general situation based on my own study, not a theory. If I really want to start a business one day, I think I should make a comprehensive judgment based on many situations. The ancients said that the use of the art of war is all in one heart.