Many people think that everyone is equal before the system. Since punching in is a company system, there is no place outside the law. Everyone must punch in according to the system when going to work, and executives are no exception!
If management is so simple, is it still management? In many companies, bosses don't punch in. They can come whenever they want and leave whenever they want. If you understand the system dogmatically, should the boss punch in?
It has been said that the company is owned by the boss, and the boss can punch in without punching in, but the executives must punch in. However, if there are many shareholders in the company, and the shareholders are also executives, will they punch in if the boss doesn't punch in? If they don't have to call, should non-shareholder executives punch in?
At this time, the problem comes, and the shareholder executives will think: The boss doesn't punch in, why should we punch in? You are not alone in the company. You have to punch in, everyone has to punch in! As soon as the boss compromises, the shareholder executives don't have to punch in, and the non-shareholder executives are dissatisfied: I am a well-paid talent hired by the company and I am also an executive. Why should I punch in if you don't play? Do I still have prestige? How can I lead the team?
This involves the problem of hierarchical management. The values of high-level, middle-level and grass-roots are different. How can we measure them mechanically and dogmatically with the same ruler? Punching in is a trivial matter, which is taken for granted by grass-roots employees. For middle managers, they think it is understandable, but for senior leaders, they think it is unacceptable.
Many of the company's top managers are talents invited by the boss. Since they are talents, most of them have a little personality. If the company lacks a unified cultural value system and system implementation system, blindly emphasizing the unity of the system will often hurt the feelings of executives, but it will not pay off.
Aiming at the problem of hierarchical management, Ma Yun once put forward his own management thought. In other words, the top management adopts Taoist thought, believes in the professionalism and self-discipline of senior managers, and advocates inaction. Confucianism, the core of middle management, is "human nature is good", which not only gives them certain power, but also gives them necessary pressure, which not only grasps principles, but also gives them flexibility. The core idea of "Legalists" in grass-roots management is that "human nature is evil", and there should not be too much flexibility and autonomy. Must strictly carry out the orders of superiors, punch in on time, and ensure working hours.
Starting from this management idea, whether executives punch in or not actually depends on one person-the boss! If the boss has a high degree of self-discipline and punches in on time like ordinary employees, then executives must punch in. If the boss can't maintain the seriousness of the system, don't ask the executives to punch in.
Trust is more important to executives than supervision. As an executive and a team player, we don't need to question his self-discipline too much. Even if they don't clock in, they won't come later than the employees. As for doing something personal occasionally, it is nothing compared with his value.