Should New Officers Replace Their Subordinates?

"New government takes office three fires", and most of them will burn to those old ministers.

Therefore, there is a sigh of "one emperor and one courtier".

Then, should the new official be replaced?

What is more essential behind substitutions?

As the saying goes, "every emperor has a courtier."

In the enterprise, whether it is the highest leader or a grass-roots supervisor, the first major event of taking office is substitution.

Even if we do not directly open people, the new official will declare that "no change of mind is a substitute for another".

It is a more mature practice to replace someone in the first 3-5 months of office.

The direct effect of substitution is bringing new people, and whether there is a new climate is another matter. But the sequel of substitution is obvious: it directly affects the safe operation of enterprises and leads to rising costs, as well as the efficiency and quality of work of employees, thus affecting the quality of enterprises and the health of enterprise culture.

Why do new officers change their subordinates?

This is also the first nature of human beings.

Babies are taught to eat because they are not born, because they are hungry.

If he is not hungry, he will never be too lazy to eat.

So laziness is the first nature of man, and diligence is the cultivation of the day after tomorrow.

It is a common phenomenon to change subordinates because the new official takes office, so that new officers must be replaced when they take office.

In fact, no!

From a new official's point of view, he also has a lazy nature. Changing people is also a tiring thing.

But the reality forced the new officer to change.

The new official is facing the contradiction between the new and the old. The old worker is accustomed to the original work procedure and the way of doing things, and the new official has a set of procedures that he has developed for a long time or thinks how to do it.

In reality, the two are completely unanimous, and most of them are inconsistent.

When a new official finds this difference, he always wants to change his subordinates.

In fact, people want to change others, and rarely want to change themselves, because changing oneself is in conflict with the nature of laziness.

The members of the original organization see that the way and style of the new official are different. In other words, they are not comfortable with the way they want to be lazy.

Well trained, endurance, strong, though uncomfortable, but do not speak on the lips, according to the leadership to do it is, at most, just slow down; and the poor tolerance, anxious employees will feel the true feelings of the heart in oral, and put into action, and the new official to do.

What will happen to the new officer when things get there?

The sword is clasped in the hands of the new official. Of course, only the employees are cut down.

Therefore, the reason why a new official wants to change people is not what people think is unpleasant to see. The fundamental reason is that they are lazy because they want to change others but do not want to change themselves.

The result is that leaders have the power to change subordinates while subordinates are changed or replaced.

Do the new officers have to change their subordinates?

Is it good for the new officers to change their subordinates?

It can not be generalized, but generally it should be bad.

After all, the original employees are familiar with the work process and working methods. If the new official is eager to change their subordinates, there will be a new official bringing the novice, so it is easy to commit common sense mistakes. If the exchange is too urgent, even the novice can not find it, the work can only stop.

If a company changes its subordinates into an unwritten convention, it is a sign of unhealthy culture.

In such unhealthy corporate culture atmosphere, once the level of supervisors changes in personnel, it will soon fluctuate among employees, and speculate about their future destiny.

In this way, when people are in danger, the staff's mind will focus on the fluctuation of personnel, instead of concentrating on work, the work efficiency will be low, the quality of work will be reduced, the quality of customer service will be unstable, and enterprises will have internal and external difficulties.

This is what nobody in charge of any enterprise wants to happen.

How can you avoid changing the bad consequences of subordinates?

Since the new officers change their subordinates will cause such a big negative impact, how to avoid new officers changing their subordinates and changing their subordinates?

My work experience is the solution to the problem and fundamentally solve the problem.

First of all, the routine workflow and working methods of enterprises must be filed in writing.

As the highest code of conduct for enterprises, no one is allowed to change privately, including the chairman and general manager.

Because these are the effective working experience accumulated by long-term practice of enterprises, and even the crystallization of innovative wisdom of many people inside and outside the industry, which is the core part of corporate culture.

How can a new official be allowed to take office and arbitrarily change the company's existing workflow?

Therefore, every new official takes a notice of "new official appointment". Just like ordinary employees learn the "code of employees" before they go to work, they should clearly stipulate that every person responsible for the new organization at all levels should strictly refrain from changing the working procedures and the conventional methods of work without authorization.

In practice, I will highlight this in conversation with the new official before taking office.

Of course, workflow and working methods are not static. The key is changing rules.

"The instructions for new officers" should expressly stipulate that any work process and working method that has been filed in writing must be formally submitted to the revised submission, pointing out the shortcomings of the original process and working methods, giving concrete revision suggestions, analyzing the pros and cons before and after revising, and submitting relevant meetings for discussion and approval.

And these meetings can not be decided by only a few important leaders or leading groups. For different amendments, it is necessary to solicit opinions from different levels of employees, to seek relevant views from all sides, and to make market investigation and analysis for external cooperative businesses and customers.

When these basic tasks are completed, they can modify trial execution or execution.

Why should such a rigorous process be used to modify the process?

Because the work process and working method should be changed. It is the core of the core of the corporate culture and the foundation of the foundation. It is not only a simple order, but must be kept relatively stable.

We must never change our minds when we are hot. After revising, we find that the new ones are not as good as the original ones.

In reality, some enterprises have changed the process system to make employees feel confused and confused. These phenomena are most obvious in the newly established SMEs.

In fact, the process of extensive discussion and discussion is not only the process of perfecting the new process and new system, but also the process of understanding the original process and the process of publicizing the new process, so that the new process and new method can be deeply rooted in the hearts of the people before it is implemented, thus greatly reducing its psychological impact on the old employees and reducing unnecessary contradictions and conflicts.

And a simple substitution is the worst way to deal with it.

If the enterprise formulating the "new official appointment instructions" and repeatedly emphasized before taking office, the new official will not release his "new classics" very soon, and will not burn the "three fires" in a hurry. All the decree plans will be run within the normative framework.

In this way, the contradiction between the new official and the old staff will be greatly reduced, and the subordinates will not be easily killed.

Even if the new officer feels uncomfortable, he will complain that the original work process is not good enough, and he will not say that his subordinates are not obedient. This will greatly reduce the reasons for the new officers to drop their subordinates, so as to maintain the stability of the staff and maintain the stability of the operation of the enterprise.

At the same time, enterprises require new officers to learn the instructions of new officers. They also emphasize that they should not change their work flow arbitrarily, and are also a kind of protection for new officials.

The new official assumes that he wants to change his face and his subordinates, and seldom thinks of changing himself.

If there is such a provision, the new official will definitely change himself and improve himself on the basis of conscientiously studying the original business process.

In fact, this is a process of mutual learning, restriction and mutual adaptation between the old and new employees.

Will the New Official Handbook will tie up the new official?

Will these restrictions stipulate the initiative and creativity of new officers?

It is normal to have this idea, but those who have such views are either acute or unbusiness.

What is an enterprise?

Enterprises are economic organizations whose aim is profit. "Stability is overwhelming."

Some bosses and business leaders are motivated or passive, regardless of their motivation and purpose. If they adopt the methods of "whole person" and "rule by man", they will cause harm and influence to the safety operation of enterprises and the efficiency and quality improvement of enterprises.

Any form of personnel struggle within the enterprise will have a negative impact on the organization of enterprises.

Notice that kindness is the only way to make money.

For enterprises, not only should we pay attention to the outside world, but also be equal to the inside.

Disharmony and class struggle can only add burden.

Some bosses want to achieve a certain goal by means of "class struggle", but this can only be harmful to enterprises.

A truly confident new official will not simply exert his enthusiasm and creativity by changing people.

Otherwise, the enthusiasm and creativity of the whole staff will be obliterated almost as much as their enthusiasm and creativity are exerted.

Is it the intelligence of a new official or the intelligence of a whole person?

The latter, of course.

If a new official knows only his enthusiasm and creativity, and knows, can not, and can not give full play to the initiative and creativity of his subordinates, such a new official is mostly a single hero, not a talented and handsome person.

He is not fit to be an official, but he can only work.

Some people will say that the new official takes office as a task: to set things right.

But after all, the new officers with such a mission are few and far between.

Even if a new official has this task, he should stress stability before he takes office, and gradually solve the problem of adverse development to the enterprise in the process of stability, instead of coming up to kill it unless he knows it well enough in advance and grasps the current situation.

Which subordinates should be changed?

Of course, if the above analysis is understood as a new official can not open and replace, it is biased.

Soldiers must not be cut off, but there must be a basis for chopping soldiers.

In contrast with the original system rules of the enterprise, those who violate the rules and regulations must be punished. They must not be vague and can not easily say "never to give an example". This is especially important for the new official taking office.

The new official assumes strict and decisive action on the implementation of the existing system. Even if the system is wrong, it must be implemented without fail.

Even if the system was changed, the offender would have to be punished.

Because the violation system is first, the amendment system is later.

If the new official does not punish the violating rules system, everyone will think that the new official is weak, and many systems will be difficult to carry out afterwards.

Therefore, those who violate the rule system must "slaughter", otherwise they will affect the enthusiasm of other employees.

However, all "slaughter" must be justified and justified. Do not be unreasonable. Do not introduce a new system because of slaughter.

Therefore, a healthy business organization is not a replacement, but a replacement. Instead of changing the company frequently, it is not a frequent substitution, but a substitution for the replacement of personnel, instead of a replacement for the sake of personnel struggle. Instead, it is a replacement for the sake of the development of the enterprise. Instead of replacing the new officer with office, it is a substitution of the enterprise rules and regulations. Substitution is not the work of a company in a certain period, but the regular work of the enterprise. Substitution is not only for the elderly, but also for the elderly.