Enterprise Management -- The Great Wisdom Of Trust Management

Most of the time, most managers believe in themselves, do not rest assured of others, often interfere with their employees' work, which is a common problem for the managers, and more so for the managers who have grown from the first line of work. But in this way, enterprises often form a strange circle: leaders do not trust their employees, and when they encounter tension or difficult problems, they want to meddle in their own hands and become arbitrary.

Employees will be tied up to form a habit of dependence, conformity and closure. The core employees with initiative and creativity will become mediocre even if they do not leave. The enterprise will lose vitality and vitality after a long time. The old saying goes: "no doubt, no doubt, no doubt, no need for people". This is a trust in people. At this point, the famous American general Barton set an example for all middle managers.

Trust is not your business or my business. Trust is what we have to do together. Nowadays, many entrepreneurs complain that the employee is insidious and malicious, and the employee is faithless and no one is trustworthy. Now think about it, do you give enough trust? Are you worthy of others' trust? Only when trust is interacted, will the power of trust come into being and the organization will become stronger. Jack CEO, a general electric company of the United States, once proudly put forward the idea of "less management is better management". He once proudly said, "I trust my employees and they trust me."

from social capital From the angle of view, enterprises have five kinds of "spiritual wealth", namely, the trust of customers, the trust of partners, the trust of employees, the trust of shareholders, and the trust of the community. The combination of five kinds of trust is the foundation of an enterprise. Among these five kinds of trust, employees' trust in enterprises is the source of this.

As a leader Only trust is needed to convince the public. In the Analects of Confucius, learning and learning, a leader must be able to assign subordinates to work after obtaining the trust of his subordinates. Otherwise, subordinates will think that their superiors are bullying him, that is, they should be involved in them. The same is true for their superiors. First, the trust of their superiors can only be pointed out after the trust of their superiors, otherwise the boss will think that he is being slandered.

The true meaning of trust in work is in a word which is not well known in China: "you handle affairs, I feel relieved." The enemy of trust is extreme perfectionists. They, apart from themselves, do not believe others have the ability to accomplish tasks. They always do things by hand, and find faults and find flaws in others' actions. In fact, dialectically speaking, for private enterprises, even when the scale is small, cronyism can even play a role in stabilizing organizations and promoting morale. However, when a company is doing a fairly large scale, a lot of things involve organizational intelligence and expertise, which requires professionals to deal with. Once appointed, some important jobs, especially the special jobs related to the survival of the enterprise, are occupied by those who are not very suitable for the post, so it is bound to cause irreparable damage to enterprises.

If Private enterprise Cronyism is a distrust of "outsiders", so the practice of some state-owned enterprises is purely selfish. This phenomenon is common in the employment system of state enterprises. As an old saying goes, "a son of heaven, a courtier", it seems that he does not build up his own gang of trusted followers, and never lay off his back road (including his children's future sources). They do not think about the production of their enterprises, but they build their own "guarantee" for the future. This ultra selfish behavior endangers the development of the whole enterprise.

Persist in "appointing people to be wise" and oppose "cronyism". This is the basic criterion for the party to select cadres according to the criteria of both ability and integrity, but in the process of implementation, it is often impossible to do so. Why? Some leading cadres are worried about their high posts. They are afraid that more virtuous and talented people will push themselves down to the political stage, so that they even have the idea of "Pai Yin". Just imagine, how can this employing system fail to cause its own prosperous enterprises to decline slowly?