Effective and well-coordinated work of employees, of course, directly affects the profits of companies, so the choice of the right personnel policy is important. It is no secret that most people are individualists, and therefore teamwork is not any business can benefit.
Over the past 10 years, interacting with very different companies, could not fail to notice that management believes in "optimization" more than in the creation of a modern personnel management system.
You May have encountered an absurd norm of subordination (the number of employees directly managed by the Manager) in companies. With all its dependence on the tasks performed, abilities and experience of the head, the best are considered to be a group of 7-10 people. However, in fact, such examples are few. Unthinkable formats delegation in hierarchical structures make the heads of "news" to hundreds of employees with diverse functions.
These approaches to the management structure caused by the misconception that group work often allows you to achieve the best result. A KPI system (key performance indicators), coupled with the bureaucracy — rather, it creates more harm than good for modern companies.
It is Curious that, in our days, the departments for work with personnel of big companies in unison declare about the development of new trouble — "social laziness." When the growth of the company staff, and reduced employee productivity (they completely cease to work). How do you justify the probable future "optimizations"?
What can I say — it is beautiful, although the effect of social laziness and was identified nearly a century ago the French Professor Ringelmann and useful HR just now. The effect itself explains the loss of internal motivation, when working in a group, employees are not ready to give up completely (relying on colleagues). At the same time, according to psychologists, workers can be sincerely convinced that they give 100%!
It is not for nothing that sometimes a permanent job is called "new slavery". When wages become a tool for manipulating the employer with the constant threat of dismissal. Even complaining about meaningless tasks, employees continue to work for the purposes of their companies. It seems easier for business to spend time on the process of finding new methods of control than on a careful selection of employees with freedom of action in achieving their goals.
You do not have the idea: "I Think I know these, they are around me"?! This is a paradox of overwork, when the crisis did not lead to a reduction, but, on the contrary, significantly increased the actual duration of the working day. In fact, few people manage to overcome the Ringelman effect, while the variable forms of project management in the conditions of big business still look a bit utopian.
On the other hand, the time of universal individualism has passed, and it is almost impossible to achieve global success alone. How to bypass this ill-fated effect of social laziness? After all, when we are alone with responsibility for the problem, then we count only on ourselves, and in the group there is an opportunity to "blame" on the other...
To me the other version explaining decrease in efficiency of work at increase in number of employees of "bureaucratic component"is closer. All the blame is the huge time spent on reports and meetings, and most importantly — the problem of information exchange employee-head/Department-Department (constant search for compromises and delaying all business processes).
After Reading different books on the subject, and discussing the problem with many managers, I believe that by creating micro-teams with a reasonable delegation of responsibility to the formal leader, you are on the way to success. And, adding to this the ability to listen to employees, demonstrating their importance for the common cause and setting clear goals-the result is guaranteed!