Down honestly, you don't need to get up, I will pick up the jade myself.
It is often heard that results-oriented, management methods are also very popular.
What is the result? HR or Boss will tell you, KPI, complete it.
Are KPIs a good approach? There is no doubt that it is.
Good approach, does it work in all cases? I'm afraid not.
I'm also saying that I'm a result-oriented person; so is communicating with team members, I don't care about the process, just give me the result.
In fact, this is uninhibited indulgence in love of freedom.
Regarding KPIs, I am not a brick home. But what I do know is that KPIs focus on quantification. The correctness and matching of the KPI and the overall goal (result) is related to whether the direction of each person's effort is combined or divided. The operation of the KPI system requires management costs.
Very troublesome, what should I do? Can the value evaluation of a member be less complicated? Could it be simpler? Suppose there is a formula Latest Mailing Database that can express the degree of influence of key factors and factors on member evaluation, what would it look like?
First, the formula is, of course, an equation.
The left side of the equation represents the purpose - member evaluation, professional point, called performance; pretending point, called it Performance; simple point, we call it, P.
Now the left side of the formula is formed, P=?
Since it is result-oriented, there must be a factor, which represents the result, or the goal (Goal).
How does G affect P?
In the eyes of a ruthless person, G has only two states: you did it, or you didn't do it. That is 0/1.
So 0/1 I/O means:
if G=0 thenP=0elseif G=1 thenP=?end if;If you don't, your P is 0. If you do, let's see.
Obviously, G is a multiplier factor, giving:
Now let's talk again, you did it, got the first 1, and then what? If the internal evaluation of an organization is all 0/1, winners and losers, P=G, without the question mark, is there a problem?
For the sales department, you are here to fight, and the purpose of raising soldiers is to use them, with high risks and high returns, of course there is no problem. What about the R&D department? Of course there is.
The problem is: R&D is a relatively long-term and stable process, and the input and output are not as direct as sales, and most of the wages of the company's R&D department are commissions. The continuity, stability and growth of the work content means that the G-spot of the R&D department is not easy to find and difficult to evaluate, and it may be constantly adjusted with the times.
Therefore, P also needs factors of other dimensions to reconcile.
There is a minimum value problem here, that is, when G=1, is the range of P in [1,+∞) or it may fall in (0,1).
Based on the four words of result orientation, I prefer the former, because of this, there is more money.
To recap, based on the above
Let's see, what other factors in the question mark part, or which ones should be motivated or recognized under the premise of achieving the goal?
I think there are two more points:
The second is ability.
Attitude (attitude) and ability (capability) let's talk about it, simple, AC United.
In Milutinovic's famous words, attitude is everything. This does not mean attitude orientation. The subtext is that, at a level like the national football team, if your attitude is not correct, you will naturally do whatever you want, and kick whoever abuses you. When the ability is not enough, you must first have the attitude and the willingness to do it, and then it is possible to have positive results.
Attitude is a performance indicator. It is often said that this person has a bad attitude/this person has a good attitude, this person is serious in doing things/this person is not serious in doing things. No one will say: This person depends seven points on attitude.