Sending routine and bureaucracy to the past or how large and medium-sized enterprises remain on top of the iceberg
Quite often, it happens that with growth, an enterprise changes from a dynamically developing to a slowly decomposing one. The enterprise is overgrown with formalism and a marshy smell is depleted from it, and it seems that the noble goal is to save external or internal threats from the malicious intent, but as a result, the company is overgrown with a set of orders, which is quite problematic to understand, I'm not talking about fulfilling it. That is, on the one hand, the market dictates the conditions in which it is necessary to simplify the life of the consumer, on the other hand, the protection of the enterprise must withstand environmental damage. And how to be here?
How to make the company constantly dynamically develop, and employees receive adequate payment in accordance with their labor investments? What to do with the problem of uneven load on the employees of the enterprise, different efficiency subordinates of the same rank with the same pay? Who wants his work to be basically creative? If you are a leader, are you ready to spend your precious time in large quantities before launching the UBPS (Management Bonus-Process System) in order to get a powerful acceleration of the enterprise’s development and increase in profit afterwards?
1. The manager does not know the specific goal, what he wants from the enterprise, from employees, which will be the result of the goal. According to my subjective assessment, less than 10% of leaders “can”, and the rest say what exactly needs to be done or how to do it or do it themselves and in the end get what they don’t want. If you want to check if there is a goal in your enterprise, do an experiment: let a third-party person ask 5 different people from different departments in your company what the company does and what is the most important thing in your company. If there are no matching answers, the conclusion is obvious. If the subordinates do not know the goal, we will assume that there is no goal (ask the sailors on the ship where they are going). Just imagine that there are several people in the boat and everyone has his own oar, if they all don’t agree on where to go,
2. The company does not and will not have a process approach to management, ie the enterprise as a whole should be covered by processes from top to bottom. It should be clear who, what, when and why does the narrative on paper. Where is the entrance and what we have at the entrance and where is the exit and what should be at the exit. The implementation of the process is individual and it doesn’t matter how you do it - through work instructions or through “Process Maps”. These processes should be lively, transparent, understandable and as simple as possible (the latter is very important!). If these processes are drawn in the form of a block diagram, linking all the processes together, then we end up with a subject area for negotiations within the enterprise. It becomes much easier to understand each other.
The classic situation, there is a problem that is understandable at the specialist level, but in the area of the decision-making center - for the head, the problem is so smeared in the description process that it is no longer always clear what the matter is. And they begin to make decisions that are not aimed at the cause.
Another example, a new employee comes in and he is told that you need to familiarize yourself with these Talmuds of all orders and instructions, which often leads to the fact that a person usually abandons this business and tries at the verbal-verbal level from others to get basic information to start work , makes mistakes and, as a result, through trial and error in half a year - becomes a specialist in a year, although in a process approach it will be one in a month.
Or, for example, documents described and approved on paper for certification, ISO, GOST, etc., or for satisfying the thirst for "big boss" documents, can bring much more sense if they are described in a process, because the fact that they are good on paper, but when they are used in fact is a completely different matter. Better is one small simple process that is working than a large-scale detailed and existing in this form only on paper. If we have the simplest and most understandable mechanism, the process participants will understand each other faster and more clearly. By analogy with the sailors on the ship - imagine that each rowing at his discretion, when he pleases.
3. The manager does not and will not have time to engage in this process. There is no involvement, no control over the results - accordingly there is no result.
4. The manager did not set up feedback with subordinates in such a way that he was not aware of the problems and the problem was not resolved before the disaster. If the company is in the habit of solving problems only from top to bottom, there is an order type - follow it, then often the company will be forced to deal with fire fighting instead of preventing them.
We determine:
1. The bonus fund. It should be beneficial for both the owner and the employees so that the profit grows. In the collective agreement with the staff, it is possible to describe the transparent rules of the game that the bonus fund is directly tied to the company's profits in such and such amount and calculated so and so, and daily or weekly show where we are. And here we strive for a golden mean. The indicator should be interesting to both the owner and staff, otherwise the ship that is excessively tilted to one of the sides may not last long.
2. Rules for the distribution of bonuses. This is where the fun begins. I better explain with a very simplified example.
You are the owner of a wholesale company and there are 10 people in your company: 5 in sales, 3 in procurement and 2 in administration. By joint efforts you considered that all the work at the moment can be estimated at 100 bonuses. Of these, 50 bonuses - on sales, 30 - on the purchase and 20 on the administration. Suppose we distributed these bonuses equally for each of 10 bonuses per person. Then if the bonus fund this month amounted to 1 million, then each employee will receive 100 thousand bonus (1 million / 100 bonuses x 10 bonuses).
For the next quarter, the owner sets a goal to improve after-sales customer service, so that the proportion of repeat orders of our customers increases from 5% to 20%. We decided to give 5 bonuses for this purpose. There was a discussion, there were willing and responsible. Responsible was 1 person from sales in a team of 3 people (1 person from the administration and 1 person from the procurement). These 3 people described the process. At the meeting, they approved (defended) the process and distributed 5 bonuses in accordance with the roles.
A month has passed. The share of repeat orders increased from 5% to 10%, but customer loyalty as a whole improved according to the survey results. Since the goal was not fully achieved, the achievement of the goal was rated at 3 bonuses out of 5 maximum. Profit increased to 1.16 million. At the end of the month, at the meeting, the head handed out 1 more point to an employee from sales for innovation and 1 point to an employee from the administration for eliminating a possible fine of the supervisory authority.
Total:one bonus in the new month = approximately 11 thousand rubles. (1.16 million / 105 bonuses) and in general everyone won, especially those participating in the new process. Thus, who, could and wanted to take the burden, received a monetary reward for this. Over time, the number of bonuses will increase, and those who do not want to do anything new will receive on average the same salary, or even less, well, and leading experts will increase their income and the company as a whole.
In addition, tasks such as:
How to make the company constantly dynamically develop, and employees receive adequate payment in accordance with their labor investments? What to do with the problem of uneven load on the employees of the enterprise, different efficiency subordinates of the same rank with the same pay? Who wants his work to be basically creative? If you are a leader, are you ready to spend your precious time in large quantities before launching the UBPS (Management Bonus-Process System) in order to get a powerful acceleration of the enterprise’s development and increase in profit afterwards?
I must say right away when the result will be close to 0
1. The manager does not know the specific goal, what he wants from the enterprise, from employees, which will be the result of the goal. According to my subjective assessment, less than 10% of leaders “can”, and the rest say what exactly needs to be done or how to do it or do it themselves and in the end get what they don’t want. If you want to check if there is a goal in your enterprise, do an experiment: let a third-party person ask 5 different people from different departments in your company what the company does and what is the most important thing in your company. If there are no matching answers, the conclusion is obvious. If the subordinates do not know the goal, we will assume that there is no goal (ask the sailors on the ship where they are going). Just imagine that there are several people in the boat and everyone has his own oar, if they all don’t agree on where to go,
2. The company does not and will not have a process approach to management, ie the enterprise as a whole should be covered by processes from top to bottom. It should be clear who, what, when and why does the narrative on paper. Where is the entrance and what we have at the entrance and where is the exit and what should be at the exit. The implementation of the process is individual and it doesn’t matter how you do it - through work instructions or through “Process Maps”. These processes should be lively, transparent, understandable and as simple as possible (the latter is very important!). If these processes are drawn in the form of a block diagram, linking all the processes together, then we end up with a subject area for negotiations within the enterprise. It becomes much easier to understand each other.
The classic situation, there is a problem that is understandable at the specialist level, but in the area of the decision-making center - for the head, the problem is so smeared in the description process that it is no longer always clear what the matter is. And they begin to make decisions that are not aimed at the cause.
Another example, a new employee comes in and he is told that you need to familiarize yourself with these Talmuds of all orders and instructions, which often leads to the fact that a person usually abandons this business and tries at the verbal-verbal level from others to get basic information to start work , makes mistakes and, as a result, through trial and error in half a year - becomes a specialist in a year, although in a process approach it will be one in a month.
Or, for example, documents described and approved on paper for certification, ISO, GOST, etc., or for satisfying the thirst for "big boss" documents, can bring much more sense if they are described in a process, because the fact that they are good on paper, but when they are used in fact is a completely different matter. Better is one small simple process that is working than a large-scale detailed and existing in this form only on paper. If we have the simplest and most understandable mechanism, the process participants will understand each other faster and more clearly. By analogy with the sailors on the ship - imagine that each rowing at his discretion, when he pleases.
3. The manager does not and will not have time to engage in this process. There is no involvement, no control over the results - accordingly there is no result.
4. The manager did not set up feedback with subordinates in such a way that he was not aware of the problems and the problem was not resolved before the disaster. If the company is in the habit of solving problems only from top to bottom, there is an order type - follow it, then often the company will be forced to deal with fire fighting instead of preventing them.
Well, let's get started. UBPS concept
We determine:
1. The bonus fund. It should be beneficial for both the owner and the employees so that the profit grows. In the collective agreement with the staff, it is possible to describe the transparent rules of the game that the bonus fund is directly tied to the company's profits in such and such amount and calculated so and so, and daily or weekly show where we are. And here we strive for a golden mean. The indicator should be interesting to both the owner and staff, otherwise the ship that is excessively tilted to one of the sides may not last long.
2. Rules for the distribution of bonuses. This is where the fun begins. I better explain with a very simplified example.
You are the owner of a wholesale company and there are 10 people in your company: 5 in sales, 3 in procurement and 2 in administration. By joint efforts you considered that all the work at the moment can be estimated at 100 bonuses. Of these, 50 bonuses - on sales, 30 - on the purchase and 20 on the administration. Suppose we distributed these bonuses equally for each of 10 bonuses per person. Then if the bonus fund this month amounted to 1 million, then each employee will receive 100 thousand bonus (1 million / 100 bonuses x 10 bonuses).
For the next quarter, the owner sets a goal to improve after-sales customer service, so that the proportion of repeat orders of our customers increases from 5% to 20%. We decided to give 5 bonuses for this purpose. There was a discussion, there were willing and responsible. Responsible was 1 person from sales in a team of 3 people (1 person from the administration and 1 person from the procurement). These 3 people described the process. At the meeting, they approved (defended) the process and distributed 5 bonuses in accordance with the roles.
A month has passed. The share of repeat orders increased from 5% to 10%, but customer loyalty as a whole improved according to the survey results. Since the goal was not fully achieved, the achievement of the goal was rated at 3 bonuses out of 5 maximum. Profit increased to 1.16 million. At the end of the month, at the meeting, the head handed out 1 more point to an employee from sales for innovation and 1 point to an employee from the administration for eliminating a possible fine of the supervisory authority.
Total:one bonus in the new month = approximately 11 thousand rubles. (1.16 million / 105 bonuses) and in general everyone won, especially those participating in the new process. Thus, who, could and wanted to take the burden, received a monetary reward for this. Over time, the number of bonuses will increase, and those who do not want to do anything new will receive on average the same salary, or even less, well, and leading experts will increase their income and the company as a whole.
In addition, tasks such as:
- the work of all employees in conjunction to achieve the goal, we are fighting for the increase in the whole pie, and not just for our piece;
- pulling out and using the hidden resources of employees, using the initiative of one for the benefit of all;
- human-oriented approach, valuable personnel will provide a constant drive, laid in the right direction.