Faced With Layoffs, How To Make Career Planning?

In 1960s P, Melvin Lerner once described a psychological phenomenon called "fair world theory": people are more willing to believe that bad things happen only to bad guys.

For example, after layoffs, survivors generally believe that the company dismissal is poor performance of employees.

< /p >

< p > but is this really the case? < /p >

< p > to answer this question, we found a company named "a href=" http://www.91se91.com/news/index_c.asp "wealth > /a > 100. The company has just undergone a large-scale layoff. We have collected a lot of data from it, trying to find out the basis for the company to decide whether to leave or stay.

It turned out an unexpected factor: a consistently excellent job assessment record.

Only 23% of the employees who had been laid off received negative job appraisement the year before.

That is to say, 77% of the employees who were laid off did not know the reason for being fired.

< /p >

< p > but when we looked at the 360 degree of work assessment of all the layoffs two years ago and asked about the reasons for the layoffs, we found a series of persistent problems.

We summed up six factors, which are signals of danger.

Those who were laid off should meet at least two of them.

< /p >

< p > strong > 1. companies believe they have no strategic vision.

< /strong > most of the 150 employees who had been unfortunate were not working in strategy making.

This led to the fact that in the 360 degree assessment, colleagues felt that their ability to formulate strategies was very poor.

On the whole, those who are laid off in the ranking of strategic capabilities rank at 3 thousand and 200 points, that is, 2/3 colleagues are in front of them.

In this regard, they actually have the opportunity to make up their minds because they have received feedback on their strategic capabilities in the previous two years' assessment.

< /p >

< p > but why they have not changed? One of the reasons is that although they work hard, they are too focused and narrow-minded, too much emphasis on the current operation, technology or function problems.

These people have valuable technical or functional expertise.

But the problem is, in tough times, what most companies need most is those who can find the winning strategy and ensure the company's competitive edge.

< /p >

< p > < strong > 2. is unstable.

< /strong > 360 degree assessment also found the problem: fired employees ranked 3 thousand and 700 in the Delivering Results rankings.

These people have had problems in the past two years, such as failing to finish their work on time, failing to participate in the project, or performing poorly, and dragging down the team level.

Although they think they work very hard, in the 360 degree of evaluation, they are not efficient enough.

Some people are considered lazy.

Some of the older employees seem to have retired ahead of schedule in their colleagues' eyes.

< /p >

< p > < strong > 3. < a href= "http://www.91se91.com/news/index_f.asp" > professional ethics < /a > and integrity is tainted.

< /strong > this is not common, but once such problems occur, employees will be dismissed.

The scope of moral decline is extensive, including non-compliance with the company's rules; improper statements or improper relations with colleagues; improper behavior in financial matters, for example, by making falsity, moving the remaining sum from one budget year to another.

In addition to explaining the employee's dishonesty, these problems reflect to a great extent the weak judgement of the person.

< /p >

< p > < strong > 4. interpersonal skills (very) poor.

< /strong > a lot of people with poor interpersonal skills gained a href= "http://pop.sjfzxm.com/popimg/fz/index.aspx" and promoted to < /a > because of their technical ability, but they failed to improve their social skills in the new position, and finally failed.

Overall, the 150 managers ranked 3 thousand and 700 in the 360 degree assessment of interpersonal skills and communication skills.

< /p >

< p > many people are seen as weak leaders, unable to influence others and lead to innovation.

Some people are very difficult to get along with, and even make people feel malicious, angry, aggressive and unable to control impulsive behavior.

Others think they poisoned the atmosphere of work.

Why do companies have to wait until layoffs to get rid of these crazy employees? Don't forget, many of them are also very talented.

{page_break} < /p >

< p > strong > 5. refuses to change, whether involving individuals or companies.

< /strong > < /p >.

< p > in the 360 degree evaluation data of 35 thousand global leaders, we find that there is a strong correlation between managers' willingness to seek and respond positively to their feedback and their overall leadership.

< /p >

< p > we even find that as the length of service increases, people will gradually reduce the behavior of seeking advice and responding positively to feedback (in our database, older employees are lower than young ones).

On the whole, the worst leaders believe that they rely on talent for promotion, just as always.

But the best leaders will continue to seek feedback and find ways to improve.

So, naturally, in the 360 degree evaluation, many dismissed managers are considered to refuse to change and reject new methods.

< /p >

< p > < strong > 6., there is no sponsor or supporter.

< /strong > nearly half of the dismissal managers have recently lost their supporters.

So in this life and death conference, no one speaks for them, they have no supporters.

The lesson is obvious.

You have to know not only "who's your strongest supporter?" the important thing is to have more than one of these supporters.

< /p >

< p > the last point is very political and everywhere.

This shows that everyone should be cautious during layoffs.

But in general, our research provides some strong evidence for the "just world theory", because no one has been fired for this reason only among those 150 dismissed.

The company decides to fire someone, at least for one or more reasons.

< /p >

< p > these conclusions also show that positive assessment, even promotion, may lead to false sense of security.

In the 360 degree assessment, the difference between positive assessment and negative evaluation proves our long-standing finding that your advantages will promote you - but in turbulent times, you should also take a look at your own shortcomings, because you may also be dismissed.

< /p >

< p > if your company is facing "a href=" http://www.91se91.com/news/index_x.asp "layoff" /a "crisis, are you sure your name will not appear on that list?"