Disadvantages Of Unqualified Leaders To Enterprises

< p > simply put, the better a leader is, the more employees invest.

Take a recent study, for example, to explore the efficiency of the 2865 leaders of a large Financial Services Company.

You will find that employee involvement is directly related to the overall efficiency of their supervisors.

The efficiency of supervisors is not only assessed by employees, but also by their superiors, colleagues and other personnel for "360 degree evaluation".

Therefore, employees who work under the lowest Leadership (leaders with a working efficiency of less than 10%) have low satisfaction, participation and commitment of only 4%, indicating that 96% of employees are more willing to work than these grumbling depressed employees.

On the other hand, the best leaders (90% of leaders) were the happiest, most engaged and most diligently employed workers (more than 92% of their colleagues).

< /p >

< p > this study is not uncommon.

We have seen the same pattern in the studies of the a href= "http://www.91se91.com/news/index_c.asp" > US < /a >, the United Kingdom, Holland, Spain, the United Arab Emirates and India.

This pattern has also been shown in financial services, manufacturing, high technology, government agencies, tertiary institutions, hospitals, food services, petroleum and all other industries we have studied.

This pattern has also been observed in organizations employing 225000 and 250 people.

< /p >

Besides P, we are not the only ones who have observed this pattern.

In a recent article, Gallup Gallup Jim Clifton (Jim Clifton) found that 60% of the federal government employees in the United States were unlucky because their salaries were low, their work benefits were poor, or their vacation days were not enough, but their superiors were very poor. (CEO)

He even raised a high position to improve the situation: "appoint the right manager.

A lot of salary and benefits can not solve the problems created by managers who are incompetent.

< /p >

< p > this is quite important, mainly for two basic reasons.

< /p >

A bad boss will deny other a href= "http://www.91se91.com/news/index_f.asp" > investment < /a >: as Clifton pointed out, other expensive schemes set up by the company to increase employee participation, such as excellent rewards, well arranged career, inspiring working environment, employee assistance program (EAP), health insurance, and other benefits, can not make significant difference for employees with bad boss. P

< /p >

< p > good boss will guide employees to increase their income: as many other studies have pointed out, there is a strong correlation between employee participation, customer satisfaction and income.

< /p >

< p > later, some people conducted similar studies for J.C. Penny department store (J.C. Penny), best buy (Best Buy) and Marriott (Marriott), and the results were similar: efficient leaders promoted satisfactory a href= "http://fz.sjfzxm.com/" > employees < < > > satisfied employees contributed to satisfied customers, while satisfied customers directly contributed to a significant increase in sales revenue.

< /p >