Workplace Interpersonal: How To Deal With Wonderful Colleagues?

The worst interpersonal relationship that a workplace person can encounter is about making use of those who are hostile to the accomplice, dragged down by the accident victims and those who are defeated.

I have seen such a person, the end is: back pot, jacking, as scapegoat.

When choosing a counterparty, you should try to ally with the accomplice, not to be endangered by the accident, to guard against and away from those who fail, and to maintain normal working relationship with those who are useless and harmless.

Once, when I was chatting with my tutor, I heard him talk about all kinds of people in the workplace.

I saw his old people's quotes, from Darwin to Russell, from Aristotle to Isaiah to Berlin. The core point is that the diversity of workplace species plays an important role in maintaining vitality and enterprising spirit.

The tutor also said that a company is so proud of the diversity of its employees that there is a piece in it that says, "We are zoo and we are proud of all kinds of of"

Classify your colleagues.

In the normal workplace environment, the basic classification of employees is only "competency" and "incompetence" in the two stage, which is qualitative.

From a quantitative perspective, it seems to be further divided into:

1. fully competent, can be promoted and given more responsibilities;

2. more competent, can provide training to promote its advancement;

3. neutrality is capable of exploring its potential to help progress.

4. less competent, can pfer jobs or provide training to make them competent.

5. totally unqualified, consider pferring or dismissing.

The author himself is a boss, that is to classify employees.

When working, the classification of colleagues is not entirely in accordance with the above criteria.

After all, I have a close working relationship with the writer, so I know that the number of colleagues who are competent or not is not large.

I believe in the basic principle of "no direct management of more than ten people at any time". Beyond this scope, the author has no say in his competence or degree.

But by understanding their interests, observing their behavior and analyzing their career development effects, they can be classified into the following categories:

1. successful (Those who make things happen);

2. accident (Those who make things happen to them);

3. defeat (Those who screw things up, for themselves &/or others);

More than 4. are not None of the above, those who are neither helpful nor harmful.

How to deal with colleagues

As mentioned before, if you regard your career as a long-term and complex paction, the most important thing in your hands is your boss.

But your eyes can't just stare at the boss. When analyzing the promotion model, the author said that if you want to climb the ladder of the company, someone will not pull you enough.

In addition to managing the relationship with the boss, it is necessary to manage the relationship with other counterparties.

I believe that the most important thing for managing various relationships in the workplace is to choose your counterparty.

There are sub Teaching: "A good lawyer chooses his client, just like a good soldier soldier"

The key players in your career are people who can have a major impact on your career.

Partners, and even competitors.

The above four categories exist both inside and outside the company.

Your counterparty may not always be the same.

However, the so-called "distance knows the horse power and sees the heart for a long time", and you get along with it for a long time, you can see the perennial state of the key counterparties, whether it is a success, an accident or a failure, or a useless and harmless sense of existence.

The author suggests that when you choose a counterparty, you should try to ally with the accomplice, not to be endangered by the accident, and to guard against and away from those who fail, and to maintain normal working relationship with those who are useless and harmless.

The worst job people can encounter

It is about making use of those who are hostile to the accomplice, dragged down by the accident, and those who are defeated.

I have seen such a person, the end is: back pot, jacking, as scapegoat.

After the best and worst cases have been determined, what you need to do is to watch the dishes and make friends when you do not violate your principles.

In the normal environment, the alliance of the working people is not malicious against third people. This alliance, which is based on the third party ties, can not last forever. Sooner or later, it should be based on the common three perspectives and interests.

Within the company, such alliances are likely to be labeled as "standing teams". This is normal and there is no need to exclude them.

There are factions and teams in the company. It is the direct embodiment of species diversity. No matter in smoking corner, tea or mahjong table, birds of a feather flock together.

There are no factions in the company, so many bosses are going to lose their jobs.

As for the Allies outside the company, most of them are formed by "three similarities", that is, former colleagues, classmates and townships, and there is no essential difference between the principles governing the relationship between them and the company.

According to the author's shallow observation and experience, this kind of person's accident mode often leads to excessive behavior, and in the final analysis, the ability to introspection and self-control is not high, though people may be very smart and efficient.

There are two kinds of defeats: one is good intentions to do bad things, the other is bad ones, and the difference is whether there is subjective intent.

These two kinds of people have seen the former. If the former is only occasionally bad and long-term good intentions, it can be regarded as a person who has virtues and talents. It can be done without working together and important things not to be given to such people. When the latter is confirmed by the author, he deliberately wants to lose things. Without hesitation, he immediately takes isolation measures and reacts vigorously when necessary, letting the other party know that he will not infringe upon the site of the author.

The basic principle of the writer is to treat people with no sense of harmlessness, but they can not deal with them without dealing with them.

To tell the truth, this label has a strong interest in color. In most cases, the writer thinks that people are useless and harmless. Just because there is no intersection in their work, there is no common hobby among their amateurs. When they go to class, they go back to their homes to find their mothers, and the well water does not attack the river. But they are the protagonists of their work and life.

The basic principle of this is "no revenge, no evil".