How we should measure managers' leadership

If you want to figure out what leadership is, then the argument is very complicated. Regardless of how people understand leadership, but the leadership itself needs to have the connotation is still clear, and I simply put these basic connotations into three areas called the content of leadership: empowerment, incentives and training.

Empowerment has always been a capability that many managers find compelling because many people, on the one hand, find it impossible to authorize because the subordinates are immature and incompetent and unable to do their jobs; and on the other hand many feel that no one at all is willing Authorization, because power is a symbol, is a responsibility, and even more status. But no matter how people think, the first measure of leadership, that is the ability to empower.

I have observed that even though many people are subjectively willing to do so, many people still can not authorize it. Why people can not authorize? The most fundamental reason is that people do not understand what is granted. Authorization is a specific concept. If the authority already possessed by the job does not require authorization, the most fundamental reason for authorization is the need to complete a specific task. Therefore, the prerequisite for using authorization is that there is a specific responsibility to be borne, and because of this In a larger sense, empowerment is used to exercise subordinates. Therefore, the precondition of authorization is the responsibility rather than the other. If the authorization is not the simultaneous release of the powers and responsibilities, the authorization will lead to the proliferation of power and the loss of control. In fact, many people feel that the loss of control after the authorization is not caused by the authorization but not caused by the responsibility. In this sense, the most fundamental principle of empowerment is that the power of determining the goal is not empowerment, the power of setting the goal is reserved, the power of defining the responsibility is retained, and the validity of the authorization is also determined.

The second measure of leadership is the ability to motivate. As a manager's basic responsibility is to encourage subordinates or superiors to play a performance, the role of incentives is self-evident. The most difficult aspect for managers is the question of how motivated subordinates can be motivated. I also agree that this is a very difficult task. However, what managers are trying to solve is precisely the question of how capable men can use their productive and creative work. The reason why managers feel difficult is that motivation requires some basic conditions, but these conditions are ignored by many people. So what are these basic conditions? The basic conditions for motivation are importance, visibility and fairness. Regardless of the incentives and techniques you use, these measures are, in and of themselves, crucial to the importance of being motivated, and if they are irrelevant to them, no matter how much effort you take, you will not be motivated effect. The mistake people often make is to replace what everyone thinks they think about one thing, to make what they consider important as something that everyone thinks is important. Visibility is another condition that can easily be ignored. Incentives need visibility to enhance the effect. Therefore, the incentive needs to express the visibility, and there is no effect of invalidity without the visibility. Whether the incentive is implemented in a fair and reasonable environment is the third basic condition. Just as Olympic medals, which have the strongest visibility because of the world's attention, are of central importance because they appear simultaneously with national flags and national anthems because they compete through competition in the sports arena through accepted rules of the game. The combination of the three Making the Olympic medal has a non-evaluation of the incentive effect.

The third measure of leadership is training capacity. Because of the changes in competition, because of the constant updating of knowledge, and because of the demand of innovation, people need to constantly be promoted. In fact, for most managers, one of the most urgent thing is to train successors, no successor is the performance of traditional managers, an effective manager should be able to train successors, and have successors. For subordinates is the responsibility of managers, which can produce job performance on the one hand, a more important aspect is that managers can allow themselves to have more time and space to deal with more important things. So most of the time the manager should be described as a coach, a teacher. I've always been interested in GE's successor selection process, and Jack Welch spent 10 years cultivating future CEOs for GE, and more effectively, beginning with the first 1,000 people, these people got a full Of the promotion, and finally only one person got the CEO's position, but 1,000 people have been trained, the strength of these 1000 people for GE is the spread of 10 years of core competencies. These days are watching the 49th World Table Tennis Championships, just saw the 16th win of the Chinese women's team, in addition to excitement and praise, but also feel the leadership of the Chinese table tennis team, because it is continuous training and Training, making Chinese table tennis the world leader.

In leading this function, too many people think leadership comes from power, which is part of the source, but it does not matter, the important thing is how to influence others to do what the leaders do and be able to do a good job! People who face, there are only two situations: do things well or do not do well. We need to do the right thing, there are only two situations that we can not do well. One is that we do not do it and the other does not want to do it. We should not do training that we should not be willing to do so should be motivated, so no matter what managers are facing the kind of people, the results are the same, they do things, the key lies in: empowerment, incentives, training.

Recently, we often ask whether it is possible for China to produce a class of professional managers. It is very natural that everyone cares about this issue because the development of Chinese enterprises has entered the stage of separation of the two rights. Without a large number of professional managers, the development of enterprises will receive Hinder However, I can not directly answer this question. The key factor influencing the professional manager's class is not the stage of business development, but whether the quality of Chinese entrepreneurs has risen to a high level: the ability to co-exist with professional managers. Because of the power of capital, there is an initiative on how to establish a good working relationship between the boss and the professional manager. Therefore, I think that entrepreneurship can become the key. UF's Wang Wenjing and He Jinghua seen before the breakup, although the strategic differences between the two sides become the fuse, but if not able to make good use of leadership, even if the strategy is consistent, it is difficult for professional managers to things Well done. This 10 years we have focused on training in business administration, but neglected the training of leadership, so the emergence of "directors do not know", "boss as president," the general phenomenon, but these phenomena are not resolved, the professional manager class is not The real meaning of the emergence, there is no real business development.