As it is not strange – but favorite work raises questions. The most important: why sooner or later any, even the most wonderful work begins to tire? And everything seems to be as usual – the same five leaders instead of one; still the same small salary on the card; the same work is not for oneself, but for others. Maybe because initially something garbage is something wrong?
The most fun dances in my memory are dances with various “fresh” managerial innovations. It is decided, for example, to introduce a time management system in a company from a certain day D. Forms of documents for setting tasks and reporting are prepared and approved. The staff is thoroughly instructed, trained, and … everything remains as it was: running, rubble, rush jobs, constant deadlines – and 30% -40% of work time, actually to work.
Or also funny – let’s get an ISO certificate, and at the same time we will write (or draw) business processes. And a great hike for a certificate begins – business processes are described, job descriptions are written by diligent department heads … and in the end the certificate is simply bought, because in the pursuit of the eternal Soviet “best of all” BP are idealized, and according to the CI written in full According to the Labor Code – almost impossible to work.
A particularly vivid example is motivation. The decision made over the years has been made – “from now on, the motivation of employees for the shock work to be!”. Then a vague and superficial document is approved, which specifies the maximum presence of the term “motivation” in the company and determines the top management responsible for the “distribution of elephants”. Well, as a result … You guessed it? Zero.
Purposelessness in strategy (or the presence of only one goal – money) gives rise only to emptiness. It is impossible to move from point A to point B, if B is some unknown or (worse, a variable). It is impossible not only to move, but also to determine the routes and ways of achieving … And the main steps out of the above examples are generated precisely by the absence of a goal as such.
I have already noted once that the organizational structure of a company is a consequence of the business processes working in it (this idea, quite independent, later found confirmation). All the same – in connection with the strategy and the daily (operational) activities of the company: either the strategy determines the operational activities (and tactical tasks in the first place), or the tactics determine the strategy itself.