For example, when you arrive in Europe, you will soon imitate western knife and fork etiquette. However, when a foreigner arrives in China and insists on using a knife and fork, you can easily accept the fact that he doesn't use chopsticks, which is "tolerance" for his "shortcomings and deficiencies". This is probably another kind of "human rights" or "democracy" with Chinese flavor. In the words of Mr. Gu Hongming, this is a virtue of "non-aggression".
Therefore, the culprit is what the leaders call "the virtue of not invading others." I don't want to be a villain, so I "take the lead" in getting things done when the results seem to come out. The result of individual is performance, and the result of organization is team growth. Guo Shina, former president of IBM, said that others will not do what you expect, but will only do your inspection. This inspection is a clear requirement.
Secondly, from the external behavior pattern, what is the difference between the so-called invasion and demand? Under the well-intentioned "tolerance" (this is the bottom thinking mode), superficial harmony has become the result of pursuit, no matter whether the whole communication is "chicken and duck talk" or the same channel. Many times, you can understand every Chinese character, but the true meaning of the sentence is realized in different ways in the process of "enlightenment". It can be seen that the development of Chinese in business today is basically at the stage of "expecting others to understand". Such work efficiency is inevitably low.
A recent study in the west found that using a foreign language at work is more efficient than using a mother tongue (such as English). Seeing this, you may think, I can't speak English. How can I speak English? You are not mistaken, but you can't talk, so you can talk. Tell me all the mistakes. It is your stuttering English level, mixed with all kinds of vocabulary and grammar mistakes, that has achieved unexpected efficiency. For example, I don't know how many meanings will be derived from "having dinner together at noon" You said, hey, let's/kloc-go to dinner at 0/2? I can't believe I got it all! There are no distractions.
So the second biggest culprit is the working language. The ancients in China were very clever and used classical Chinese for thousands of years. The vernacular Chinese changes with the times, while the classical Chinese remains basically unchanged, forming an efficient organizational language. Until the vernacular movement of 19 19, and now 100, we all think that classical Chinese is pedantic. So we urgently need to form a "standard interactive language" in our work. Don't underestimate this process, take the meeting as an example. The time and output value wasted by enterprises at meetings are enormous. In fact, we only need to make some norms in language interaction, the time of basic meetings can be shortened by 80%, and the resolution can be improved by more than 5 times!
To sum up, how to solve these two culprits?
First, the requirements are clear and definite.
I summed it up as from feeling to standard. The leader said to the staff, you did a good job. The employee said, boss, I will work hard. What effective information have you got from this communication?
The sender of the instruction needs to know that doing a good job is an expectation. How to specify the requirements? This is the result of communication among the three:
One is quantification;
The second is to be specific;
The third is behavior.
How much is completed when and where is quantitative. To what extent, this is concretization. What you need to do is to behave yourself. Quantization comes first. For example, when you are asked to complete a task, you need to eliminate the words "try your best", "work hard" and "do well". This is not where employees need to work hard, but where leaders need to regulate themselves.
The second is to standardize the working language.
The standardization of working language is a long-term behavior, and one or two words can't be finished. Let's give a few simple examples.
For example, did you emphasize the five whatevers in your work? All work must be planned; If there is a plan, there will be results; Every result must be responsible; Where there is responsibility, there must be inspection; All inspections will be rewarded and punished. This belongs to the level of enterprise management buzzwords. The advantage is that you don't need to lecture employees on what is good and what is bad after every mistake. And this series of languages can be completed by simply building an environment.
For example, language norms in reporting work separate "symptoms" from "diseases". You ask: How is the matter going? The subordinate replied, not bad. What effective information did this question and answer get? You ask, what do you think of our team? He said that the team ability is too poor. Where do you solve this question and answer?
The first problem is the standardization of result language, and the second problem is the separation of symptoms and diseases. Whether things are done well or not is compared with the prior definition. It is not good or bad by feeling. Art can do this, but management can't. What I prefer to hear from the evaluation team is that, for example, the phenomenon of being late and leaving early is serious, so we can prescribe the right medicine. For example, everyone is unwilling to take the initiative after receiving the order, which is fear of difficulties. For example, if people don't feel anything wrong, then it's a question of culture and rewards and punishments. All these problems should not be simply summarized as "poor execution"-such a summary will not help you find the key to solving these problems.
Today, with the development of enterprises, all enterprises have entered the era of total factor competition, including the competition of strategy and business model, incentive system, team execution, management leadership, innovation and market resources. It's hard to say which factor can determine your success or failure. But these points need to be built continuously. They can't hedge each other
As the conclusion of this article, I want to say a word to you: don't do things with the habit of being a man. People pay attention to kindness, honesty and responsibility. Doing things is the spirit of scientific data. We pursue good deeds, but they are not necessarily related.