If a team leader wants to successfully and innovatively complete the work he is responsible for, the first problem is how to build and lead the team. Therefore, having an ideal team is the dream of every top manager. However, in front of senior managers who come to a new environment or face new challenges, this dream often becomes a challenge: how to evaluate the team of former managers? Should we change them or vice versa? If it doesn't fit, should it be changed one by one, or "one pot"? How to deal with the contradiction between team change and rapid performance growth? Wait a minute. Under the same goal, every new manager will face a very different environment and ways to deal with problems.
Set up a team or make a strategy first.
Ma Yue: In the past five years, I have had two chances to accept the challenge.
1999, when I was still at HP, the whole company was engaged in service transformation, so HP wanted me to lead a new team to HP Consulting Division to do consulting business. I was transferred from other departments to a small consulting team within the company and was ordered to transform the employees of the company. I accepted the challenge. At that time, in the new department, the team existed. The biggest question for me is, should I use this team to accomplish the mission of the company, or should I bring some capable people in to do things well? My choice at that time was to use the original team and then gradually join some new people. The focus is not on how to transform our team, but on how to unite this team and how to carry out business. This method is successful. Our business increased several times that year, and the service transformation of the company was completed almost one year later.
I joined Lenovo at the end of last year, and Lenovo hoped that I could get Hampton consulting up. As you know, Hampton was founded six years ago. When Lenovo was injected into Hampton, Hampton was already the largest management consulting company in China, and the company was moving from the initial stage to the large-scale operation stage. Lenovo wants to put me in, and hopes that I will carry forward this company and help Lenovo to transform its services.
After I went in, I basically applied my previous experience. The original team was basically retained, and then one or two people were added to individual positions to re-formulate the company's strategy, business model and process. Up to now, my objective evaluation is that the progress is not as fast as I thought, and of course it is not too bad. Why is it slow? This caused me a lot of thinking, and after comparison, I came to a conclusion. In an international company like Hewlett-Packard, we can show our initiative more quickly. It will be very effective to change the strategic mode of business by using the original team. The employment system of international companies is in a mature stage, so the right people are basically used in their original posts, but you need to use a correct strategy and method to take this business down.
Later, I used the same method in the Hamptons, and the effect was not very good. My reflection is because the growing enterprise has not yet had a good mechanism. We say that the more we go up, the more we need to give play to our strengths. In this company, there is no doubt that the team is still an excellent team, and they are all excellent people. Otherwise, the company would not have developed so fast, but basically these people have not been able to really do the right thing for everyone in the right position, so if they just focus on adjusting their strategies and doing a good job at this time, the result will not be so fast.
I have an experience. As a professional manager leading a team, the situation is really different in different environments and different given situations. So I think the direction of a company is the relationship between strategic direction and team. In my opinion, whether there is a team or a strategy first depends on different scenarios. If you are at the top of the company, what route you take often depends on what kind of people you have, especially what kind of leaders you have. But at the operational level, under the established framework of some companies, it is more to build a suitable team according to the established strategy, which also has a long-term and short-term relationship.
Use valuable ideas to improve.
Bi Chunbin: I used to work in a foreign consulting company, but later I went to Heguang to reorganize my business. I used to do consulting, and consulting was often untrue. Foreign companies have the characteristics of foreign companies. First of all, large foreign companies don't care about capital flow, but about turnover; Second, all policies of foreign companies have standards, and they only need to follow that standard. But if you go to a private enterprise, you may find that everything is unreasonable. At this time, you must adjust it, and this adjustment process can bring great results to it.
In fact, I will always regard my old job as a mirror of my work today. I can now imagine what my mind will be full of when I reach the light of harmony. It is the operation mode, core competitiveness, organizational structure and corporate culture. I understood these words myself, but I found that when I finished, everyone actually had a sarcastic meaning on his lips, that is to say, you are the kind of person who only talks but doesn't practice. But after a long time, I found that people really didn't understand the true meaning of these words, so when I became more and more influential in this company, my language changed consciously. I won't talk about the profit model. I'm talking about what the business style is. I think this sentence sounds understandable to everyone. For example, I haven't talked about learning organizations in the past. Our initial corporate culture was called "Hecheng Chuang", which is a very old language. Later, when I talked about "Yi Hui Yong", I used the local dialect.
With a team, your goal is clear, which is to create value. When I first came here, I was under great pressure to improve my performance. So at this time, I was wondering whether to take a sharp turn or a big turn. A sharp turn may make 80% people lose, and a big turn will change some people's minds and make some people lose. I thought about it, but I still dare not make a sharp turn. I made a big turn, and this process is the process of reshaping a team. In this tempering process, people who are in general agreement with you become more and more attached to you and become your backbone, and some people who pursue comfort and selfishness naturally peel off. After about a year, we changed from doing PC business to doing high-end servers, networks and networks.
In this process, everyone saw confidence in the future and learned a lot. In this process, our salary level is declining, but our spirit, level and creative benefit are improving. Of course, this inertia may be difficult to maintain for a long time, but I think it will last at least for a while, because you can exchange the improvement of team members' ability for the loss of their income. In this way, I dare to talk about corporate culture, profit model and execution in this team today, because what I said today is not empty and everyone can understand it.
I don't think it's the key question whether to use the old team or the new team. The key point is that you really went to a place where you think you can shape the value of the enterprise, and then you unified all the people with valuable views and promoted everyone, and then eliminated the bad people in the process and promoted the potential people quickly. This is what the new team did.
Don't take anyone.
Guo Jun: Speaking of teams, in the company where I worked, I should say that every time I change jobs, the teams are basically updated, and they are all updated on the spot. I never take old people to a new company. This is one of my practices, which may be related to the characteristics of my industry and these companies, because the real estate circle is very small, and everyone is familiar with it and the boss.
These people were not my team in the past, but after I was here for a year or two or three years, these people became my team. Then when I left, I adhered to this principle and still didn't bring anyone. Looking back now, most people will continue to use the company, most people are doing well, but some people will leave, but other reasons, I think, are personal.
In the real estate industry in China, I have worked as an executive in almost all the most famous companies, including Vanke, Huayuan, China Resources and Olympic Garden. I choose to be a partner today. When it comes to the new manager and new team, I think of a poem about China's past officialdom and China's imperial examination system, that is, "Some people quit their jobs and go back to their hometown, and some people rush to the imperial examination at night", and there must be a new follow-up after the end of an old one.
Managers must be the backbone of society, but in today's China, they don't have enough status, and they don't get enough respect.
Two days ago, I read an economic report in a southern newspaper, quoting a senior executive of my former partner company's comments on our recent job changes. The original words probably mean that these people are too eager to pursue personal brands, or are eager to establish personal brands, which will cause problems in the company or the relationship between decision-makers and management. Something like this is not objective.
In fact, managers are always in a weak position, and your platform must rely on the enterprises you serve. If you leave the company you serve, your personal brand will lose its value. Today, if a manager changes jobs, there are basically many negative comments from outside. Managers who leave passively must have poor performance, and those who leave voluntarily are disloyal. Therefore, in such a society, when the commercial society in China has not really matured to this day, the value of managers is very weak.
There is land in the world.
Zhao Qiang: I think I have parachuted to three places in recent years. I have parachuted the most. These three places, whether Hong Kong or the Mainland, are private enterprises. Speaking of forming a new team, I think the first question is whether you have the right. Many people who work as professional managers in private enterprises may also face this problem.
My general feeling is that there is such a rule. When the business performance of this enterprise is particularly poor, when you enter, you may be given more rights at first, that is to say, you have room to change people, or you have room to change some people, or you are more likely to trade according to your consciousness. But when this enterprise is relatively successful, I think you may not have great rights when you enter. You must first integrate into this enterprise. I think this is the first problem you face. I think a successful enterprise will feel successful. Even if the boss often wants to change, he is sincere when he wants to change, but he is sincere when he meets some problems and has other ideas. I think this is a contradictory question, and both sides are sincere.
Personally, I think this is the first problem that an operator faces. There is a world and a land in the world, and you are caught in the middle. Either you are indomitable or you are smashed down. You have to change because of the changes in the situation of heaven and earth. For example, whether I want to stay in this place for too long depends on the space he gives me. If the space is not suitable, I don't need to stay here. I think all this needs to change and take the initiative.
I think I am quite detached. Life is an experience. I just want to sell all the consumer goods. At that time, I had a deeper understanding of consumer marketing than others. I can graft various industries. This process is a great pleasure for me.
interaction
The team problem of the founder enterprise
Moderator: Excellent domestic enterprises often have the nature of * * *, which basically belongs to the founder enterprise and is led by the founder. What problems will you face in a founder-led enterprise? This team is often built by you, not only in China, but also in West Renye Fang. If you leave this position and hand over your team to others, how will you work for them?
Ma Yue: I think as a professional manager, you should have brains. The leader of Citibank said that whether you do well or not depends not on the current performance of the enterprise, but on whether the enterprise can be as good as when he was here five years after his retirement. I agree with this view. In some top enterprises, we can see similar phenomena. For a real professional manager, it is often not personal heroism, that is to say, this mechanism is so good, not because I am in office, but because I can help this enterprise build a strong team, and it can still go better without me.
Guo Jun: I'm afraid this is still a question of the value of professional managers. When it comes to the individual actions of a team, it is often said that the more mature the system and the more mature the team, the smaller the role of the individual. I don't think it's important for us to talk about whether these people listen to me or not. What's important is to consider your mission as a professional manager. I quite agree with Zhao Zong. I think so too. Your life experience, I just like doing it. This is my most important goal. The emergence of professional managers in modern society is inevitable. I believe these bosses will be mature and mature enough not to ask for "one heart". These managers just need to do their things professionally.
Personal value and loyalty
Audience: I have a question for Mr. Guo. Everyone should be responsible for his career. Yes, his career is his own. But as a manager, what role do you play for your subordinates when they plan their careers?
Guo Jun: Of course, when I was in management, I had a dual role. I am a professional manager, but I am also a representative of the management. At this time, I have two views on the team; First, you must never say that you are loyal to me. Say manager Guo, I'll do it for you. I'm sorry to say that, but I can't afford it. Second, I think your personal value and personal choice are always more important than the choice of the enterprise. If you have a good job today, it's really a good choice, and I'll support you right away. Because I think your life is more important than my work in this company, I won't ask you to sacrifice your happiness in life to serve me or my goals. In this way, I can have a better relationship with these subordinates. Because you are someone else's boss, that's not forever. You still have to be friends.
Audience: I have some opinions. As Mr. Guo said just now, you don't take a person to a new company, which is in line with the appetite of investors at present, but it is not the most reasonable way, and I don't quite agree with it. On the contrary, I admire the president of a company. He said that when he went to a new company, he would use one third of the old employees, keep one third of the old employees and recruit another third.
One-third of them bring their own, which is convenient for their work. One third of former employees can ask him about his original history, and one third can recruit from outside to enrich your culture. I think this may be a better way for an enterprise, but whether investors like it or not is another question.
Audience: I come from a management consulting company. I think there are some different views on what General Guo said just now. I think loyalty is still very important, depending on which stage you are in management. If you are in the start-up period, loyalty may be very important. In more developed companies, from the perspective of the boss's role, employees first give you the enjoyment of personal value. Without this, it is difficult to have loyalty, and even if there is, it is short-lived. I think this kind of loyalty is the cohesion of a team and must be combined with your performance, so I think loyalty may be more important at a specific stage of starting a business or an enterprise. And if you are the boss, your relationship with the following person is actually an investment relationship. You shouldn't love one of your subordinates, but he is actually an investment.
The road to development
Compere: Last time Zhao Zong parachuted into Mei Ting, I learned a new word called professional manager. Professional managers are one floor closer than professional managers. If you tie your careers together, you are equivalent to sitting in a chariot, and you can't escape from the explosion. It is almost the same to say that marriage is at least a trial marriage.
Bi Chunbin: Actually, the trial marriage has obtained a legal thing. Zhao Zong has been very successful in selling things here and there, but I don't think it's interesting for you to sell things again. It might be interesting to start another company like Guo Jiangjun. I will be an investor. What does Zhao Zong think in this regard?
Zhao Qiang: I think I am a person who thinks once a year. For example, I don't want to be my own boss because I have a weakness. Making production is my weakness. I happen to have a piece that is very good, that is, whatever I sell can be sold quickly. I have been playing this strong point, and I have been working hard. I hope to sell this job in the future and have the opportunity to be a marketing teacher. The marketing I teach is definitely more exciting than other university teachers. This is just a dream, a possible change.
Ma Yue: I think our discussion has unconsciously shifted from the team of managers to the views on development and life path. This is wonderful, and this is the fundamental question in everyone's mind. I want to share two things with you.
The first thing, from the example of my boss Liu Chuanzhi, chairman of Lenovo Group, to today, there is no doubt that he has all kinds of property, honor and status, but let's take a look. 465,438+0 years old to start a business. I believe that 465,438+0 is older than any of us when he started as a profiteer, but after so many years, he has been very successful, one step at a time. But think about it, if we all start from scratch now, everyone can do it.
For another example, McKinsey's company teaches people how to make strategies. Later, many people came out, some started their own companies, and one third changed from McKinsey coaches to athletes. I asked them, do you mean that everyone wants to go out as an athlete from the coach after learning the skills? Their answer is: McKinsey has two kinds of people, one is the last to stay, and the other is the last to jump out to be an athlete. Where is the dividing line? People who go out know very well that what they like is status and power, including money. But who was left behind? Those who stay are people who especially like to help others. They are good teachers, like teachers and enjoy them. They can work at McKinsey all their lives. About a third of these people are skilled, but he enjoys the immediate pleasure more. So back to the topic of life, I quite agree. Choosing what to do is almost a person's experience, or choosing your own lifestyle. The question is what kind of lifestyle do you choose? In my opinion, no matter what you choose, choose what you like best and do the best in it, which is the most successful. What we are saying is that in this process, each of us has the opportunity to become an entrepreneur, a manager and even a consultant, but what should we do? You must choose what you like best.