Enterprise management one, two, three

by xuqing1202 on 2009-12-06 02:30:35

I got to know Professor Wang Zhongqiu from his book "Details Decide Success or Failure", and it was indeed enlightening to have the chance to meet him in person and listen to his lecture on "refined management". Business management is a profound subject, involving people and matters, and every aspect needs to be smoothed out; otherwise, internal chaos within the enterprise will become the biggest form of internal consumption.

1. Study the problems existing in enterprises

From the data obtained through research, we can see that in a sampling survey of 1745 private enterprises, there are several prominent issues in the operation and management of Chinese private enterprises. Every time I see these issues, they are worth pondering:

A. Lack of scientific, systematic, and clear strategic planning (92%)

B. Absence of a scientific salary and work performance evaluation system, where "negotiated wages" test employees' negotiation skills (91%)

C. Emphasis on established rules and regulations, but many jobs lack specific norms and standards (87%)

D. Being overly critical of employees, hoping for all-round talents, leading to evident structural shortages and serious turnover (83%)

E. Bosses and senior executives lead in breaking corporate rules, with shareholders and family members implementing multi-headed management (76%)

F. Misunderstanding of rules, focusing more on "control" than "management" (69%)

G. Overusing relationships with relatives and friends, neglecting professional capabilities (69%)

H. Excessive centralization of power, with basic no authorization given to grassroots managers (67%)

I. Emphasizing operations over management, where top management focuses on orders, self-acting micro-pressure regulating valves, and the boss serves as the number one salesperson (56%)

Reflecting on these concentrated issues regarding current enterprises, is our strategy clear and feasible? Have we established a scientific salary and employee performance evaluation system? Are our rules and regulations accompanied by specific norms and standards? Have we broken any corporate rules? Do all positions and levels have sufficient authority to encourage their initiative and proactivity at work?... These thorny questions need to be addressed one by one during the company's current operational process. If there are problems, corrective measures should be formulated immediately. If there are no problems, then this should serve as a spur for future business management, continuously improving and refining.

Especially considering the current organizational structure issues of the company, has a suitable position been constructed according to a scientific framework, clearly defining job responsibilities and matching the right people to these positions? Has an effective performance evaluation management system been established to motivate employees? This issue is a very practical one affecting business operations and requires serious consideration and continuous improvement. For example, is the current business department structure consistent with the company's established operational development strategy? Can the logistics comprehensive department structure maximize work efficiency? Are there too many hierarchical distinctions in the management process, and do they help to bring out the work enthusiasm of each level? Does the current management structure truly bring out the maximum potential of everyone? Is the currently matched performance evaluation system effective?... These issues need to be carefully addressed!

2. Process is more important than resources

In current enterprise management, a significant contrast between domestic and foreign enterprises is: Foreign enterprises operate based on processes, where each person is a link in this production line, working together to ensure smooth enterprise operations. Even if some or all of these people leave, introducing a new batch of people following the pre-set process will still yield the same results. However, domestic enterprises often rely on the personal abilities of one or a few individuals to establish a matching process. Once these people leave the company, it quickly enters a period of confusion. Thus, domestic enterprises fall into the vicious cycle of constantly searching for and recruiting external talent. In comparison, it is much more cost-effective to maintain a team of assembly-line workers with second-rate salaries than to support extremely capable individuals who might act unpredictably with first-rate salaries.

This stark contrast also highlights a significant truth: enterprise operations cannot depend on an individual or a certain model but must rely on an effective set of processes. Only in this way can normal operational order be maintained, and the maximum energy of each person can be utilized to participate in the enterprise's operations.

McDonald's can be replicated worldwide because its core is reducing front-end operations to just cashiers and order-taking, placing the most important and complex tasks in the back end for organization and summarization, eventually forming a complete process. This statement greatly inspired me: if it's difficult to find the right people, it doesn't matter; you can focus on developing processes. Just like the military, where new recruits come and veterans go every year without interrupting work, the key lies in having a reasonable operational process. This is the essence of the saying "an army may change its commander, but not its camp." Applying this to our company, creating such a process should be our top priority in future work.

3. Feasibility standards are more important than goals

Here's a simple example: Suppose we ask an employee to "get some fruit." The result could be anything: apples, bananas, oranges, pineapples, etc. Is this what we expected? Not necessarily. Moreover, how much do we want them to get? What is it for? When do we need it? All these factors will inevitably affect the final outcome. What does this example illustrate? In our daily enterprise management, feasibility standards have not been communicated clearly; only the goal has been stated, resulting in outcomes that aren't as desired.

Thus, in our daily management work, this issue is most likely to arise. Often, when higher management communicates a target to middle-level department managers, it is merely a simple goal without a standard. Consequently, during the transmission process to subordinates, it gets distorted, leading to hard work producing something different from what was initially intended, wasting time and human resources. We must try to break down goals into qualitative and quantitative standards for all levels of employees to execute. Special attention should be paid to middle-level department managers, as they are the intermediate points for task and goal transmission. They should accurately convey the tasks we need to execute to grassroots executors, which will facilitate the achievement of the final goal.

4. How to distinguish the management sequence

In the daily management process, another relatively obvious problem is the issue of management sequence.

A. Important and urgent

B. Urgent but not important

C. Important but not urgent

D. Neither important nor urgent

These four seemingly simple issues, how many can truly reach perfection? We often waste a lot of energy and time on trivial matters while being confused about important ones, ultimately affecting the advancement of enterprise operations.

Therefore, in the daily management process, we must learn to analyze the nature of these issues, manage time reasonably, and improve efficiency. Time management methods can be used to enhance the completion of work within a unit of time, focusing on core tasks during a specific time frame. At the same time, as much delegation as possible should be carried out for non-critical tasks that others can handle.