The title picture comes from: Figure Worm Ideas.
1/5, the core duties of “the staff”
Last week’s article analyzed a phenomenon: Chinese companies have a “feature” of militarized management, and they have transplanted many military management methods, except for a very important department in the military, the staffing system.
In this article, I analyze the core responsibilities of the “staff”: “Decompose” the strategic intent of the war commander into a series of executable tactical tasks. At a certain time, at a certain place, a certain army moves in a certain direction at a certain time, a certain army is responsible for interfering with the enemy, and a certain army must stay in position during this period, etc., so the staff department is Army’s “Order System.”
In the company’s business activities, it is also necessary to transform the strategy into specific tactics for multi-department coordination. In the previous article, I also analyzed the question “why does Hyundai do not have such a role as chief of staff?” The responsibility of “tactical coordination” has been replaced by the mechanism of “joint meetings of various departments”, and the responsibility of “strategic transformation” has been decomposed by the CEO and various functional departments.
(I haven’t read the first half and need to take a look first: Do you have any misunderstanding about “executive power?”
But this does not mean that the problems caused by the absence of the staff member can be completely solved, because the staff member also has an important role of “talent echelon” in the military system, which is also meaningful to the company’s operations today. This is the subject of the second half.
2/5, National Staff Staff System
I recently read a book on the history of the War of Resistance Against Japan— “Moving the Mountains and Rivers: The National Army’s Fighting Power during the War of Resistance”. The old question-why did the Kuomintang’s resistance in the early stages of the Anti-Japanese War endure a thousand miles later?
In positive history, the Kuomintang criticized the active resistance to Japan in the early stage and the passive resistance to Japan in the later stage.Many different technical analyses have been given. One of the most important reasons is that the lack of talents makes it difficult for the staffing system to support military operations.
Before the War of Resistance Against Japan, there were two military schools. One was the Baoding Army Officer School. From 1912 to 1923, the other was the more famous Huangpu Military School, which was founded in 1924.
“Huangpu Sheng” is famous, but in fact, Huangpu in the early days was a less standardized and fast-track training course. The first few months of training went to the battlefield, and it was the main source of the lower ranks of the National Army. The school lasts two years, and most of the teachers have graduated from Japanese non-commissioned schools. They have advanced weapons and are selected for merit. There are even elementary and junior high schools. The graduates have a much higher military quality. Senior general.
There is a statistical data in “Moving Mountains and Rivers”. Among the senior officers before the War of Resistance Against Japan, the commander-in-chief level was all Baoding students, the army and division level. The ratio of Baoding students to Huangpu students was three to one. At the end of the Anti-Japanese War, the number of students in Huangpu was much higher than that in Baoding.
Why is the downsizing of senior generals and staff at the army and division levels so serious? The reason was that in the early days of the War of Resistance Against Japan, Chiang Kai-shek had all his card cards, including more than 10,000 grass-roots officers trained by German advisers, most of whom had the ability of staff, and most of them were sacrificed.
Soldiers can be recruited again in the short term, but it takes a year or two to train staff staff. Where can I train during the war? This caused the national army’s staff to be blocked in the middle for a long time.
In the previous analysis, grass-roots officers were promoted quickly based on military merit. This was not a problem in ancient times because the ancient war command was relatively rough and relied more on the battlefield’s ability to respond. But in the current war, senior officers rely heavily on the ability of the chief of staff to “strategize into tactics” in command.
The result is a senior military officer, who is better than actual combat experience and weaker than military theoretical literacy. In the late period of the War of Resistance Against Japan, the chief of staff was able to recognize the characters, and many senior military officers could not find a person who could understand the map. People, the problem of blind command is common.
Don’t underestimate the map. Today, people who study geography may not understand the military map below.
In the past, most senior officers did n’t even have the consciousness of going north, south, left, west, and east. The refinement of tactics had to fall on the map. For example, the command was interspersed and cut. Look, there is a big mountain between the two goals, which can only be passed around. This requires the chief of staff to implement these strategies according to the specific terrain.
In addition to combat, the staffing system also assumes the role of “talent of talent”. It can be said that from the middle and lower rank officers to a senior commander, the chief of staff or staff officer A good transition, not only good at tactical arrangements, but also direct contact with high-level strategic decision-making processes.
Comparatively, in the Eighth Route Army, the downsizing of officers is not serious, and the staffing system has also been greatly developed. Of the ten marshals who founded the country, four have been chiefs of staff.
So, what does the role of the “staff echelon” of the staffing system have to do with modern enterprise management?
3/5, such asWhy break the “Peter Principle”?
There is a “Peter principle” in the management world: Everyone will be promoted to a position he is incompetent. In the end, there is an incompetent person in every management position of the company.
Why is this happening? Generally, the assessment of promotion is based on whether the person is qualified for the current job. However, the lower the position, the heavier the executive force, and the more upward the strategic decision-making ability is required. Those who are qualified for the lower-level positions may not be qualified for high-level positions. Therefore, under normal circumstances, a person will always encounter a position that he is incompetent, but the general company lacks a regular demotion mechanism, resulting in the person eventually staying in a position that he is incompetent.
If you want to resist the effect of “Peter’s Theorem”, it is necessary to let potential employees who are likely to be promoted to contact higher-level work content in advance to determine whether they are capable of qualified for higher-level positions. This is the construction of the company’s “talent echelon”.
Of course, this is not to let grassroots employees make decisions directly, but to undertake some “task decomposition” work.
The so-called “task decomposition” is to decompose the strategy of the upper layer into tasks that can be executed one by one, but the strategic information cannot be lost.
Each layer of work tasks involves “task decomposition”. Take the example mentioned in the previous article, “Distribution channels sink to fourth- and fifth-tier cities.” This is a strategic direction. After the first layer is decomposed into the marketing department, it becomes a series of tasks, one of which is ” Find new dealers for low-tier cities. ”
Further down: establish reasonable dealer investment standards and investment procedures; further down: dealer recruitment, training plans, coordination requirements, management models, assessment standards, etc.
It seems to be smooth, but in actual work, it is often the more down, the more details, the more “strategic information” is lost, which has led to a substantial reduction in strategic intention in actual implementation. Complete the task in order to complete it.
The disconnect between strategy and implementation has serious consequences.
In The Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Zhu Geliang often conceals his strategic intentions and arranges specific tactical tasks just like the chief of staff. This situation can only occur in the novel for the purpose of enhancing drama. In a real war, if the strategic intent is hidden, there will be no coordination between the subordinate military forces.
The reason why everyone does n’tI feel that Zhuge Liang’s approach is problematic, because we subconsciously believe that lower-level soldiers and officers must be brave, regardless of tactics and strategies, as long as they rush forward to donate their lives to the country, they can win the battle with a high probability.
But the problem is that if the lower-ranking officers can’t access the high-level strategic intentions for a long time, you can never find the soldier who can be a general.
A mediocre employee likes to complain about the unclear task, and an employee with development potential, he sees not only the task itself, but also the company’s development strategy behind the task.
Many people may want to ask: How did this ability come about?
Part of it comes from talent: Do you have a big picture by nature and can acutely discover the essence of the problem, not the direct cause? Do you focus more on the general rules of your work than on the specific situation?
Part of it comes from the usual business perspective and theoretical studies: Do you focus on all kinds of business information purely for your personal hobby? Read the management classics systematically? Is it possible to relate the status quo of the enterprise to certain business theories?
Part of it comes from the work mentality: Are you willing to pursue longer-term returns?
However, these capabilities belong to higher-level strategic analysis capabilities, and may not be directly reflected in the current work results. Therefore, these potential employees may not be able to stand out. Even if the boss consciously explores such Employees also need to have some specific tasks, so there must be a system similar to the “staff” to be able to find this type of employees who can “break Peter’s theorem.”
In the past, the staff was not a single person, but a military command system that implemented vertical management. That is, staff officers below the company were controlled by the staff. Such a setup can subjectively guarantee the strategic intentions of high-level personnel. Implementation at the grassroots level has objectively cultivated the strategic awareness of grassroots staff.
A lot of people may ask, now that you say this “staff system”So God, but today’s companies don’t have it, aren’t there a lot of companies with excellent management?
Yes, it can work in the past, it doesn’t mean it will work in the future.
4/5, Changes in the competitive landscape
In the past ten years, corporate management has placed great emphasis on employee motivation, which is the best choice in a large environment.
The past ten years have been a decade of rapid economic development and entrepreneurial opportunities, and also a decade of enjoying the demographic dividend. On the one hand, there is a market, and on the other hand, there is a sufficient supply of human resources and the core of management. Is to match the two-
To find the best market, opportunities are fleeting, so the best strategy is “quick”, which requires decentralized management and focus on execution. It does not require a strong degree of management precision. Like the command of ancient war.
To find the best talents, in an era of abundant supply, the best strategy is to use the word “find” instead of “cultivation”. The company has always said “two The toads on the legs are not easy to find. Are there not many people on two legs? “Therefore, the requirements of managers on talents are higher than the requirements on the management level of enterprises.
Furthermore, in the rapid evolution of business and the rapid flow of human resources, “Peter’s Theorem” will be temporarily invalidated because of the large number of external vacancies for job vacancies. Affected by “the current job is competent”.
The most suitable system is the best system. Various factors have led to the past need for “staff” in enterprise management.
However, as the Chinese economy enters the L-shaped vertical, the industry also enters the elimination competition of stock competition, which is closer to the cruel nature of war. More and more companies will find that the “horse race” management method is not easy to use. On the one hand, there are fewer and fewer new market opportunities, and we must “slow down” and practise internal skills; on the other hand, the shortage of human resources, after 1995 and after 00, is becoming more and more individual, and getting worse tube.
In the past, we emphasized company culture and employee motivation. In fact, we are simplifying management. If the shoes do not fit, we will find more suitable shoes. Therefore, employees of a company are like all shoes of a person. It’s a size. But now the shoes areMost of them don’t fit well and refuse to “change”. What do you do?
Applying the term of war, the former was to use the most elite troops to seize unmanned high ground at the fastest speed. Now it is a brutal battle. Most soldiers are thinking of not giving up their lives in vain.
This change in the competitive landscape has brought about a change in management philosophy.
5/5, flexible management companies
The “institutionalization” of the search for potential employees may only be a small piece of future management change.
The 1950s in the United States, where the master guru Drucker became famous, is very similar to China today. There are many market opportunities and sufficient human resources brought by baby boomers. Therefore, in his management system, people occupy The dominant position requires motivation and corporate culture to give everyone a unified mind.
To this day, when Dario wrote “Principle”, management became engineering and became hundreds of principles. It is completely based on the system. It is believed that employees do not need to be motivated and should find their own way to do things. the rules.
In the past, every company wanted to be a great company. The better you are, the easier it is to find good people. But Today, we have to admit that the company that can live is the best company; in a few years, the company that can retain employees is already invincible.
So, instead of struggling to ask “how to make the post-95s and post-00s obey 996”, it is better to think about more realistic issues and how to adapt management to their personality.
In the first half, I talked about the reasons for the origin of the staff in the army: let smart and lazy people, smart and hard-working people, dumb and hard-working people have their own responsibilities.
Some good soldiers can never become generals, and some unqualified soldiers are “handsome”. To adapt to the diversity of people, we need to have a more complex and flexible system like the “staff system” Management system to adapt to change.
In the past, being able to find a group of equally good people and running the same goal was an excellent company. But in the future, can make a group of people with different life demands, different levels, and different ability structures to achieve the company’s goals together under a highly flexible management system in order to become a living company.