Love

Drucker effective leader summary. An effective leader is Peter Drucker. Drucker for every day

Peter Drucker, the founder of modern management, based on many years of observations, came to a paradoxical conclusion: "strong professionals", excellent specialists in their field, rarely become good leaders. This is due to the fact that management is a very special kind of professional activity, the result of which is directly related to the personal effectiveness of a person. Personal effectiveness, according to Drucker, is not an innate quality. But it can be learned by developing and properly using your strengths. And five techniques developed by management gurus will help in this.

How to become an effective leader? Peter Drucker, in his famous book The Effective Leader, provides a serious and comprehensive analysis of the main management tasks of a modern company and proposes a strategy for solving them. By adopting this strategy, any manager will be able to develop the skills necessary to successfully manage a team with high intellectual and creative potential.

Friendship between the manager and employees: is it necessary?

3 main questions about efficiency

Unlike many business textbook authors who teach how to manage others, Peter Drucker encourages readers to learn how to manage themselves first. From his point of view, this is the surest way to improve managerial efficiency.

“Management abilities are different for all people, but those who can manage themselves, their actions and decisions successfully manage others,” he writes in the first chapters. “Self-management is a skill that every person can acquire and develop in himself from childhood, in order to apply it in adult life in work and personal contacts with other people.”

According to Peter Drucker, the main means of effective management of any business and any number of subordinates is a personal example. But people willingly follow only those leaders who have learned how to optimally build their own lives and achieve their goals.

Starting a conversation with readers, Drucker formulates three main questions:

What does "effective management" mean?
What do you need to do to become an effective leader?
How to make effective decisions?

The seven chapters of his book are detailed answers to these questions. The first two chapters present theoretical calculations related to the concepts of efficiency. In the five chapters that follow, Drucker outlines five key performance development techniques and provides practical guidance that any manager in any area of modern business can apply.

"Employees are scarier than competitors": 5 management secrets from the founder of Dell

The dropshipping business model has made Dell number one in the US and the second largest in the world. Answering the question, what is the secret of his success, Michael Dell admits that the main thing for business is people: “If there is a distance between you and your subordinates, and the company’s philosophy is not close to employees, they are more terrible than competitors. Sooner or later, with indifference and negligence, such employees will destroy the company from the inside. Therefore, Dell personally selects candidates for vacancies, monitors compliance with corporate culture and does not allow specialists to stay in one position for years.

The editors of the magazine "CEO" prepared an overview of the principles of management that helped Dell capture the market.

What is effective management

Peter Drucker examines the concept of effective leadership using examples from US history and his own business practices. Comparing industrial and post-industrial society, he analyzes the essence of the manager's work and reveals universal management principles that do not depend on the size of the company and its field of activity.

An effective leader in an industrial society: military or civil servant

In an industrial society, everything was subordinated to production tasks. To evaluate the results of labor, quantitative criteria were used (primarily productivity). Workers were mainly focused on creating wealth and goods.

There were few effective managers, because the real need for them was small: in production they were replaced by controllers armed with clear instructions and standards. But these controllers, according to Drucker, were not real leaders in the modern sense.

As the author explains, in the industrial age, effective leaders were most often found in the military or in public service. That is, where and when, in conditions of limited resources, the leader had to take personal responsibility for decisions that affect the fate of many people.

Examples of Good Governance from US History

General Lincoln won the Civil War and led the US government, relying on a small group of functionaries.

During the Second World War, only 1,900 people served in the government apparatus of Theodore Roosevelt.

An effective leader in modern society: one who knows how to correctly set and solve problems

Starting from the second half of the 20th century, business efficiency began to be measured not by the number of products produced / services rendered, but by the ratio of costs incurred and the result obtained.

Technological progress, computerization, and increased competition have given rise to new professions and forms of work. The most valuable human resource has become not manual workers, but knowledge workers actively using their knowledge, creativity and imagination.

Drucker explains: “The knowledge worker does not produce a material product: shoes, machine parts, etc. It produces knowledge, ideas, information. By themselves, these “products” are useless. Another person with a different set of knowledge needs to take his work as input and turn it into a final product, put it into a real form.

The management of such employees required a new approach to the organization of the work process and new criteria for evaluating the result.

According to Drucker, leaders of the new age are "knowledge workers who, by virtue of their position or knowledge, are obliged in the course of their activities to make decisions that have a significant impact on the result of the work of the entire organization."

The effectiveness of a leader in a post-industrial society is the habit of correctly solving the tasks that make up the management of any business or organization. Such a leader must, with the help of his mind, education, experience and personal example, organize the process of effective and productive work of his subordinates.

Communication between a leader and subordinates: ethics of business relations

4 obstacles to effective management

For a manager of any level, there are four main realities (they are also obstacles) that are almost impossible to control:

time;
the flow of events;
the complexity of interacting with employees within the organization;
concentration on the internal processes of the organization to the detriment of external goals.

These obstacles, according to Peter Drucker, create the main obstacles to the effective work of the leader. Since it is impossible to cancel or completely eliminate them, the author recommends that managers first of all develop the skill of setting priorities. This will help in any situation to concentrate on the main task and properly allocate time.

Summing up the theoretical reasoning, Drucker notes that efficiency in work is not only the habit of doing the right thing and expediently, but also a set of certain practical methods. Following these techniques is another good habit that a leader should definitely learn.

“All effective managers ... differed from each other in temperament and abilities, in the field of activity and in the way of doing work; they had different personalities, depths of knowledge and interests. In general, they differed in almost everything that defines personality. What united them all was the ability to do the right thing.”

5 techniques for developing effective behavior

1. Time management. Effective leaders always know what their time is spent on. And they work systematically to manage the portion of their time that they can actually control.

2. Installation on the final result. It is necessary to focus on global achievements that go beyond the current tasks. Control must be paid not to the process of performing work, but to the final result.

3. Development of strengths in yourself and subordinates. In difficult situations, it is necessary to rely on strengths and not dwell on weaknesses. You need to start work with those tasks that you are able to solve.

4. Prioritization. An effective leader always attends to matters of paramount importance and never gets distracted by secondary ones.

5. Ability to make the right decisions. Correct decisions are a system: a series of necessary steps in a given sequence to a certain result. It is important for an effective leader to learn how to work in this system. For this you need:

always have your own point of view, but do not discard dissenting opinions;
never make spontaneous decisions;
improve the quality of decisions, not their quantity; A quality solution is one that brings you closer to the goal at the lowest cost.

Drucker discusses each of these techniques in detail in the book. In essence, they are the answer to the global question: "How to become an effective leader?".

Method 1. Rules for effective time management

Time is a unique resource that is always in a state of scarcity. At the same time, Peter Drucker believes that the pursuit of strict time planning rarely brings the desired results. “How people spend their time and how they think about it tends to vary quite a lot,” he writes.

Register time - i.e. actually figure out what it is going to.
Allocate time - choose priority tasks and allocate the exact amount of time to solve them.
Consolidate time - group small things into large blocks of business tasks.

Systematic time management helps managers record actual time spent and regularly review their schedule.

This approach to time management allows the manager to:

to catch and exclude "chronophages" - time eaters;
delegate the execution of certain tasks to someone who can handle them better than him;
reduce the unproductive waste of time of their subordinates (meetings and other events that do not bring any practical benefit to the company).

“All effective leaders constantly monitor their time management activities. Not only are they constantly recording and regularly reviewing their time expenditure based on their discretionary time analysis data, they are setting deadlines for their most important tasks,” writes Peter Drucker.

In advising executives of various companies, Peter Drucker described four main business situations that require targeted work to reduce non-productive time:

the company constantly has rush jobs or crises on the same problem (for example, the delivery of a project or report on time);
the manager has to spend more than 10% of his time on resolving conflicts and resolving disputes within the team;
aimless and unproductive meetings of various departments and structures entered the system;
information exchange is poorly established, the system for fast and accurate transmission of up-to-date data has not been built.

Method 2. Setting the end result and global goals

Peter Drucker is convinced that an effective leader's focus on the end result can be expressed in one main question: "What can I personally do to improve the results and success of my organization?"

The “trick” is that, answering this question, the manager naturally moves from private tasks to strategy, from simple productivity to result orientation. “At this stage, he trains himself to think about what he is paid for and what contribution is expected in return. The answers to these questions lead to the establishment of high standards for oneself, a clear statement of one's own goals and the goals of the organization, and an increase in interest in values, ”explains the author.

Thus, the leader sets high standards for himself. He takes responsibility for a common goal, and does not act in the role of a subordinate, content with the fact that "the authorities are satisfied."

“Someone who is focused on his contribution to the overall success and takes responsibility for the results is literally the representative of the top management of his company, even if he works at the lowest organizational level. After all, he is responsible for the efficiency of the company as a whole,” writes Peter Drucker.

According to Drucker, focusing on individual contributions to the overall success of an organization is the key to effectiveness because:

improves performance, standards and results;
improves relationships with other people - bosses, colleagues, subordinates;
allows you to choose the best management tools (for example, when holding meetings or compiling reports).

Drucker's conclusion is also global: effective leadership is unthinkable without the manager's personal involvement in the success of the company as a whole and without personal responsibility for his own contribution to the common cause. A leader who does not ask himself the question of his personal contribution to the result has no right to demand the same from his subordinates.

The ability to inspire and demonstrate personal responsibility for the success of a common cause are two more important features of an effective manager.

Method 3. Developing Strengths

Describing the methods of effective behavior, Peter Drucker places special emphasis on developing the strengths of the company and its management.

He gives leaders the following advice:

1. Avoid excessive criticism, do not dwell on shortcomings and weaknesses. “Focusing predominantly on weaknesses and shortcomings generates some problems both in business and in relationships in the company, while focusing on the strengths of subordinates, partners, senior management and your own makes the team work as productive as possible.”

2. Evaluate professionalism without regard to likes and dislikes. For many leaders, it seems the right decision to surround themselves with people who are psychologically comfortable, often to the detriment of their professionalism. Peter Drucker sees this path as dangerous, leading to inevitable favoritism, intrigue, unhealthy competition - and ultimately to a general decrease in work efficiency.

3. Give subordinates a personal positive example. A positive example is always associated with demonstrating one's own strengths (each person has their own).

Drucker explains: “An effective leader knows that the standards for the performance of a group of people are set by the example of the leader. Therefore, he will never allow a leader's activity to be based on anything other than his true strengths.

Peter Drucker suggests that leaders follow four simple rules aimed at finding and uncovering the strengths of subordinates:

Any position, if two or three employees succeeded in it in a row, who perfectly coped with their duties in previous places of work, should be considered impossible and converted.
Make each position large and meaningful. The test task for a candidate for a position should be so broad that all the necessary qualities that affect his results appear in full force.
You should start working with people by exploring their potential, and not by issuing instructions to perform standard duties.
Use the strengths of employees and at the same time be able to put up with the weaknesses.

Workshop: how to determine the real potential of an employee?

In order to correctly assess the real potential of an employee and understand where his abilities are superior to those of other candidates, Drucker suggests using four test questions:

1. What is this employee/candidate doing well?

2. What else can he (with a high probability) do well, based on his abilities?

3. What is needed for him to learn to use his strengths to the fullest?

4. Would I like my son or daughter to work under this person in the future? Why?

The answers to these questions, supported by facts and observations, give the manager a clear picture of what his employee is like.

“The task of the manager is not to change the nature of a person, but, as the biblical parable of talents says, to increase the ability of the organization as a whole, using all the strength, all the health and all the aspirations of individual workers.”

Method 4. Rules for prioritization

Peter Drucker gives leaders four basic guidelines for prioritization.

1. Choose the future, not the past. The main thing in the ability to choose priority directions in the work of the company is not an analysis of what has already been done, but a bold look into the future. It is the focus on the future that helps the leader to choose a non-standard (or daring) solution, set realistic deadlines and bring the approved program of action to life.

2. Focus on the opportunity, not the problem. The meaning of this work is to find resources to achieve the goals of tomorrow. “If there is any master secret to efficiency, it is concentration. The stronger and more successfully a person concentrates his time, efforts and resources, the more diverse tasks he will be able to solve,” the author explains.

But it is necessary to make a conscious effort to break out of the "vicious circle" of past problems. To do this, it must be remembered that the priority tasks are always turned to the future and bring them closer to the goal, while the secondary ones, at best, make you stagnate.

3. Choose your own direction in business, do not go with the flow after the winners. That is why it is so important to avoid dwelling on routine problems: they prevent you from seeing the real problems of your business. The priority should be to focus on competitive advantages, on what your company does better than others or even for the first time.

4. Set big goals, don't hide behind safe and simple solutions. Only ambitious plans and tasks, despite all the associated risks, will give a visible result - one worth fighting for. "Concentration on what is essential and right and the courage to impose one's own decisions regarding the priority of tasks is the only hope of a leader to become the master of his time and circumstances."

Method 5. Making the Right Decisions

The fifth and last technique for developing effective behavior is at the same time a practical answer to the third global question formulated by Drucker for managers: "How to make effective decisions?"

How, in practice, to make decisions that meet the conditions of the task?

Drucker identifies five stages in the process of making an effective decision:

the manager's awareness that the problem is of a general nature and can only be solved by developing a new rule or principle;
definition of "boundary conditions", i.e. specific requirements that must be observed in the course of solving the problem; the simplest example of "boundary conditions": the work must be handed over on the 5th at 12 noon in the amount of 26 printed sheets;
search for the “right” solution that will fully satisfy all specific requirements (“boundary conditions”). The focus then needs to shift to "fitting": compromises and concessions so that the final solution is acceptable to all parties;
search for a mechanism for implementing the solution;
providing "feedback" - a channel that will allow you to track the process of implementing the solution and its result.

But Drucker also draws attention to the fact that even the most far-sighted decision cannot be implemented if the performers are not involved in the process of implementing the decision and are interested in its results no less than the leader.

Human factor

An important part of making an effective decision by the manager is the interaction with employees. You need to be able to hold constructive meetings and not only inspire employees with your own example, but also motivate them with interesting prospects. Moreover, the higher the level of education and intellectual development of a specialist, the less significant for him is only material compensation for labor costs.

Six Principles of Weil and Sloan

As striking examples of solving managerial problems, Peter Drucker cites the activities of Theodore Weil, who headed the Bell Telephone System, the largest private telecommunications company on the entire North American continent, and Alfred Sloan, Jr., who actually created the General Motors Corporation. Both organizations, thanks to the contributions of these two legendary leaders, have been in existence for over 90 years.

Weil and Sloan made different business-specific decisions, but they both followed the same decision-making principles:

It is necessary to assess the situation sensibly. Some tasks (strategic) are solved on the basis of fundamental considerations and global goals. Other tasks (tactical) require a pragmatic approach based on the needs of the moment.
Action should be taken if the benefits clearly outweigh the costs and risks.
One must act or refuse to act, but one must not evade decisions (or make “half-hearted” decisions).
If necessary, one has to make a choice between two compromises (between bad and worse). As an example of such a difficult choice, Drucker cites the famous "judgment of Solomon" - about the separation of the child.
Most of the time and work takes not making a decision, but its implementation. Until the solution is implemented, it is only an intention.
The implementation of the solution should be as close as possible to the capabilities of the average worker and as simple as possible.

Thus, according to Drucker, an effective leader solves a problem only once. But he decides in such a way that in the end there is a clear script that anyone can follow, or a rule that everyone understands. And the team obeys the decision made the more willingly, the better it is explained to each individual employee.

Summing up the conclusions, Drucker gives a kind of aphorism: "An effective leader is a leader who makes effective decisions."

You can read other useful conclusions and tips from books by subscribing to the Main Thought. Business books in brief. The list of books included in the collection can be viewed

Peter Drucker

Effective leader

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the copyright holders.

Legal support of the publishing house is provided by the law firm "Vegas-Lex"

This book is well complemented by:

Drucker for every day

Peter Drucker, Joseph Macchiarello

Management. Challenges of the 21st century

Peter Drucker

Steve Jobs. Leadership Lessons

Jay Elliot, William Simon

Warren Buffett

I am happy that my book is being published again. Since its first publication in 1966, it has become very popular with a wide range of readers around the world and has been translated into more than two dozen languages. This book is highly recommended reading for employees of many international companies, large and small, both those who have just taken their first leadership position in their lives, and those who have been promoted. The need to learn effective leadership is always relevant. The effectiveness of a leader is not due to the "talent" and certainly not the "brilliant abilities" of a person. An effective leader uses practical methods that can and should be learned. In our increasingly diverse society, it is becoming more and more difficult to work effectively as a manager, and this applies not only to business, but literally all organizations. Efficient work is equally necessary for the self-realization of the individual and the effective operation of the organization.

This book is both a concise plan for improving the performance of the head of the organization, and a practical guide to self management in the name of achieving high results - both within the organization and outside them. This is the best introductory course in management theory and organization theory for those who are not related to management - students of non-core universities and faculties and specialists from other fields of activity.

The book is the result of the author's twenty years of experience in management consulting, and it all began with the development of a program for senior executives in the administration of President Eisenhower. The book has long been on the must-read list for employees of many business organizations and all managers who have received a new appointment, regardless of their level and experience. It is also highly recommended reading for all administrative staff at some of the world's largest universities, such as department heads and deans. The same can be said about the heads of hospitals. The book has proven to be of great benefit to more than a million people who have founded charitable or other non-profit foundations and organizations in the United States over the past thirty years. Everyone knows that every developed society today has become society of organizations, and the success (and even survival) of any organization, regardless of its functions, depends on performance of its leaders.

Peter Drucker

Foreword

Management books usually talk about managing people. The theme of this book is self-management in order to increase the effectiveness of your activities. Whether one person is able to control other people has not yet been proven by anyone. But you can always manage yourself. Managers who do not know how to manage themselves to improve the efficiency of their activities will not be able to effectively manage colleagues and subordinates. Management is largely carried out by personal example. And leaders who don't know how to effectively organize their work and work environment are setting a bad example.

To work effectively, intelligence, diligence and erudition are not enough. Efficiency is a separate category. However, it does not require special skills, talents, inclinations, or training to be effective. To get results, the manager needs fulfill certain - and quite simple - rules. This small set of rules is described and commented on in my book. These are by no means "innate" qualities, absorbed with mother's milk. Having worked for forty-five years as a consultant to a huge number of leaders in a variety of organizations - large and small enterprises, government agencies, labor unions, hospitals, universities, public services in America, Europe, Latin America and Japan - I have not met a single "natural" leader, who would be born with the ability to work effectively. Everyone who gets high scores today studied hard and then practiced the necessary skills for a long time until they became a habit. But everyone who has worked on themselves to become strong, successful leaders has succeeded. Efficiency is not only possible - it need learn to.

Executives are paid for their performance, whether they are managers responsible for both their job responsibilities and the work of other employees in the organization, or they are independent professionals and are solely responsible for their contribution to the success of the company. Without efficiency, it is impossible to achieve high performance indicators, no matter how much knowledge you put into your work, how much time you spend on it, how much effort you put in. So far, however, very little attention has been paid to the effectiveness of managers, and this, in general, is not surprising. Organizations—whether they be commercial enterprises, large government agencies, labor unions, large hospitals, or universities—are relatively recent. A hundred years ago, few people dealt with large organizations - except that they went to the local post office to mail a letter. And the effectiveness of the work of a leader is the effectiveness of a person in an organization. Until recently, there was no reason to focus on the performance of managers and worry about its low performance for many of them. However, most people now, especially those with good education, work most of their lives in organizations of one type or another. In all developed countries society has become a society of organizations. Now the effectiveness of the individual's work increasingly depends on his ability to work effectively in an organization, in a leadership position. And the effective functioning of modern society - and even its chances of survival - increasingly depends on the effectiveness of the people who manage it and occupy leadership positions. Effective leaders are quickly turning into the most important resource of society, and efficiency in a leadership position is becoming an urgent need for any person aimed at success, self-realization and achievement - both young, just starting to work, and someone who has already gone a certain way up the career ladder.

Efficiency can be learned

To work effectively is the main task of the leader. In whatever field of activity the leader works - in business or in a hospital, in a state institution or in a trade union committee, in a university or in an army unit, he is first of all required to correct execution of tasks, or manifestation of efficiency. Simply put, he is expected to work effectively.

Nevertheless, sometimes leadership positions are occupied by employees who do not have high efficiency. Developed intelligence among leaders is a very common quality. Often there is a rich imagination. The level of erudition is usually also very high. However, there is no direct connection between these qualities and the effectiveness of the manager as an employee. Mentally brilliant people are often surprisingly inefficient workers; they sometimes do not understand that with the help of intellect alone it is impossible to achieve significant success in work. And they do not realize that a developed mind will contribute to efficiency only under the condition of purposeful and hard work. And vice versa, in every organization there are very effective employees, true hard workers. While others frantically rush about, imitating a hectic activity that even very smart people sometimes take for “creativity”, such a hard worker, seemingly slowly rearranging his legs, reaches the goal first, like a turtle from an old fable.

The circulation of 2007, published by the publishing house "Wilms", is now unlikely to be found, but in 2012 the book was published by the publishing house Mann, Ivanov and Ferber.

The effectiveness of a leader is not due to the "talent" and certainly not the "brilliant abilities" of a person. An effective leader uses practical methods that can and should be learned. Management books usually talk about managing other people. The theme of this book is self-management to increase the effectiveness of your activities. The fact that people are generally able to control other people has not yet been proven by anyone. But you can always manage yourself. Managers who do not know how to manage themselves to improve their performance will not be able to effectively manage their colleagues and subordinates. Management is largely carried out by example. …the performance of an individual increasingly depends on his ability to work effectively in an organization, in a leadership position.

Download a summary in format

Chapter 1 Efficiency Can Be Learned

Even the most gifted people can be surprisingly inefficient; they sometimes do not understand that thanks to one ability it is impossible to achieve any significant success in work. Intelligence, imagination and knowledge are essential qualities, but only in combination with efficiency will they be embodied in results. The system of measurement and evaluation - from the organization of production and accounting to quality control - used in relation to physical labor is not applicable to intellectual labor. That is why work on necessary product is a measure of the effectiveness of intellectual work. The knowledge worker does not need petty tutelage. He can only help. At the same time, he must direct himself to the fulfillment of the tasks set, that is, to efficiency.

Education is precisely the area in which America is most competitive. Education can be considered the most expensive investment we know of. The return or productivity of a representative of mental labor is expressed in his ability to solve urgent problems. This is what is called efficiency. Activities in which knowledge is the main driving force cannot be quantified. This activity cannot be measured by the costs incurred. Intellectual activity is determined by its results.

I call “managers” (“leaders”) those knowledge workers, managers and individuals who, by virtue of their position or existing knowledge, must make decisions in the course of their activities that have a significant impact on the result of the work of the entire organization. If managers do not strive for maximum efficiency in their work, they will simply turn into bureaucrats who serve the prescribed hours.

There are four main problems that are practically beyond the control of the leader. … each of these problems hinders the achievement of positive results in the work.

Organization as a social phenomenon differs from a biological organism. However, it is subject to the same law that regulates the structure and size of animals and plants. According to this law, with an increase in size, the surface of the habitat increases in a quadratic proportion, and the mass in a cubic one. … as the organization grows and its visible achievements, more and more attention, energy and abilities of the manager are directed to internal events to the detriment of the fulfillment of the tasks facing him and the achievement of real efficiency for the outside world. …relevant external events are often of a qualitative nature and cannot be quantified. They can't be called "facts" yet. After all, facts can be attributed to those events that someone has already identified, classified and, above all, endowed with relevance. … it is not the trends themselves that are important, but their changes.

One of the weaknesses of modern education is that young people limit themselves to knowledge in one narrow area and treat all others with disdain. ... each of them should have an idea of the meaning and objectives of those disciplines that are not directly related to them.

The concept of "effective personality" simply does not exist. Those effective managers with whom I had to meet were strikingly different from each other in abilities, temperament, what and how they did, personal qualities, knowledge and interests. In other words, they differed from each other in everything that defines a person's personality. They were united by one important property - they achieved the fulfillment of important and urgent tasks. …efficiency is something like a habit, a set of practices that can always be learned.

There are five basic elements to improve the efficiency of worker management.

1. Effective managers need to know what they are spending their time on. The ability to manage your time is an essential element of productive work.

2. Effective managers must focus on accomplishments that go beyond their organizations. They should be focused not on the performance of the work as such, but on the final result. A good manager, before embarking on a particular task, asks himself the question: “What results should I achieve?” The very process of work and its methods fade into the background for him.

3. Effective managers must build their activities on strong qualities, both their own and those of their leaders, colleagues and subordinates, and are also obliged to look for positive moments in specific situations.

4. Effective managers focus their attention on a few critical areas in which the implementation of the assigned tasks will bring the most tangible results. They must learn to set priorities for work and not deviate from them. Actually, all their activities should consist of the implementation of priority tasks.

5. Finally, effective managers must make effective decisions. And this is, first of all, a question of consistency, that is, the process of completing a task must take place in the correct sequence. It should be remembered that an effective decision is always a judgment based on “disagreement of opinion” rather than “consistency of facts”. Too much haste leads to bad decisions. There should be few solutions, but they should all be fundamental. Decision-making must be guided by the right strategy, and not momentary tactical considerations.

These five elements of managerial effectiveness are the focus of this book.

Chapter 2: Know Your Time

According to my observations, experienced managers do not immediately rush to solve their problems. They start by analyzing their time, not by planning - first they think about how to allocate their time. Then they try to control time, the most important element of which is to reduce overhead. Finally, they reduce their "personal" time into the largest and most interconnected blocks. Thus, this process consists of three components:

time registration,
time management,
consolidation of time.

Experienced managers know that time is limited. The performance limits of any process are set by the scarcest resource. In the process we call "achieving a goal," that resource is time. …time is absolutely irreplaceable. Within certain limits, we can always replace one resource with another, for example aluminum with copper. We can replace human labor with capital. We can use more knowledge, use the intellect more intensively. But we cannot replace time with anything. …nothing is so characteristic of effective managers as their reverent concern for time.

Although man, like all living beings, is equipped with a “biological clock,” he lacks a reliable sense of time. …if we rely on our memory, we don't notice what our time is spent on. …knowledge workers, and especially managers, must learn to manage their time in larger blocks.

Most of the time is spent communicating with subordinates. Those leaders who think they can discuss the plans, directions, and performance of their subordinates for fifteen minutes are simply deluding themselves.

In order to achieve real results, the knowledge worker must be focused on the performance of his organization as a whole. In other words, he must strive to achieve the results with which his organization goes out into the outside world.

In order for knowledge workers to be successful in advancing the cause, the leaders of modern organizations must devote a significant amount of time to meeting with them and discussing all problems. Sometimes such meetings are held even with the younger staff. Managers typically ask the following questions: “What do you need to know about your job? Do you have any original suggestions for our organization? What existing reserves can be put into action? Do you foresee any undesirable turn of events that no one but you can foresee? What would you like to know from me regarding our organization? Without such discussions, employees lose their enthusiasm and turn into bureaucrats - "timers" or direct their efforts to a narrow area of their interests that are not related to the needs of the organization. However, such mini-symposiums require an enormous investment of time, especially since they must be conducted in a leisurely and calm manner. People should believe they "have any amount of time at their disposal." Ultimately, this contributes to the speedy achievement of success. At the same time, this indicates the need to enlarge the manager's time, since discontinuity slows down the process of doing work.

The more people working in an organization, the more decisions about personnel have to be made. But quick decisions are often the wrong ones. They require elaboration and, therefore, a large investment of time. Before making the best decision, it is often necessary to consider the issue from different points of view. According to popular belief, Alfred P. Sloan, former CEO of the world's largest company, General Motors, never made a personnel decision the first time. When asked about his secrets, he replied: “I don’t have any secrets - I just proceed from the fact that the first option for deciding whether to appoint someone to a position or promote someone in a service is likely to be wrong, and therefore I scroll through the whole process of reasoning more several times before enforcing the decision.”

…recording the actual time spent can be considered the first step towards increasing the efficiency of managerial work. …systematized time management can be considered the next step in improving the efficiency of the manager. First of all, it is necessary to identify areas of wasted time in order to eliminate them. In the course of this, it is recommended to answer a number of diagnostic questions.

Identify and eliminate those activities that do not bring any results, but take time.
Next, decide which of the activities can be performed by someone else with no less (or maybe more) success?
How does the leader relate to the time of others, which he spends himself. Experienced managers have developed the habit of asking the question, “What am I doing that is wasting my subordinates’ time and not making them more efficient?”

…wasted time as a result of poor management and misorganization of work:

Chapter 3

…the thoughts of effective managers go beyond their formal duties and are directed towards broader goals. They seem to constantly ask themselves the question: “How can I have a significant impact on the effectiveness of the functioning of my institution?” Such managers constantly feel responsible for achieving their goals.

Most managers are characterized by a "downward" trend in their activities. First of all, they are concerned about increasing their own authority. Ultimately, this orientation makes managers ineffective.

When I began diagnosing organizations, I asked executives the question, “What exactly are you doing to justify your salary?” In most cases, the following answers followed: "I am in charge of accounting" or "I am responsible for employees involved in the sale of products." The following answer is also very common: "850 people work under my supervision." But there are very few who respond like, "It's my job to give department heads the information they need to make the right decisions," or "I'm trying to figure out what kind of product will be in demand in the not-too-distant future," or "I I think over and prepare decisions, which will then be considered by the president.”

Concentration on the contribution to the common cause diverts the attention of the manager from his specialty, narrow qualifications and his department. In other words, he focuses on the functioning of the whole. His attention is drawn to the performance of the entire organization. It is common for him to analyze the question of what contribution his qualifications, specialty, functions and his department can make to the organization as a whole and to the implementation of its tasks.

Ask yourself questions like, “How can I help my organization?” - it means to start looking for unused reserves at your workplace. As we know, quite often much of what is traditionally perceived as exemplary performance of one's duties is in fact only a pale shadow of what can in principle be achieved in this workplace.

Any organization tries to succeed in three directions:

achieving direct results,
articulation and maintenance of values
training of future personnel.

It is in these areas that each manager should make a concrete contribution.

An organization that only consolidates today's level of achievement loses its ability to adapt. In the life of society, only changes are constant, and therefore such an organization will not be able to survive in tomorrow's conditions. The most common reason for a manager's failure lies in his inability or unwillingness to change due to the demands placed on him by his new position. A manager who continues to do what he was successful at in his old job is almost doomed to failure.

… the higher the position a manager occupies, the greater the role played by the external (in relation to his particular organization) environment as a factor in achieving the set goal.

The most important thing is not to create generalists, jacks of all trades. It is very important to create conditions under which a specialist is able to increase the efficiency of both his own and his specialty. This means that he must identify in advance the user of the products of his labor, as well as determine his needs for those knowledge and skills that will help him to master them productively. …specialists who take responsibility for their contribution will try to relate it to the whole.

If leaders manage to establish good relationships in their organizations, it is not because they have a “talent for dealing with people.” This can be explained by the fact that in their work and relationships with others they are aimed at contributing to the common cause. Focusing on contribution implies four main conditions for effective relationships:
— communication,
- collective activity,
— self-development and
- the development of others.

Communication.…why the huge efforts to achieve adequate communication do not work? Traditionally, communicative relationships were built on a descending basis, that is, from management to subordinates. The more diligently the boss tries to bring something to the attention of his subordinate, the more likely it is that the latter will perceive it in a distorted form. In other words, he will hear what he wants to hear, and not what he was actually told. Managers who take responsibility for achieving the goal in their own work, as a rule, require a responsible attitude towards it and from their subordinates. They seem to constantly turn to their employees with questions: “For what results are you responsible to me, your boss, and to the entire organization as a whole?”, “How can you use your knowledge and abilities with the greatest efficiency?” In this case, communication becomes not only possible, but also effective. ... the goals set by the subordinates themselves almost never meet the needs of the leader. Subordinates see reality with completely different eyes. The more abilities they have, the more responsibility they are ready to take on, the more their perception of reality, its capabilities and needs differs from the opinion of their leader or organization.

Focus on contribution leads to the emergence of communication diversity and makes possible collective work. A question like "Who should use the results of my work in order to make them effective?" immediately reveals the significance of a person in a team, regardless of whether he belongs to the management team or an ordinary worker.

Self-development largely depends on the concentration on the contribution to the common cause. A person who asks himself a question like “What is the most important contribution I can make to this organization?” is actually asking the following: “In what direction should I develop?”, “What knowledge and skills do I need to acquire in order to be capable of making this contribution?”, “How much effort will I need?”, “What parameters should I set for myself?”

Effective meeting. Effective managers… ask themselves, “Why are we having this meeting?” “Do we want to make a decision, make a message, or figure out our direction?” ... you can hold a meeting and listen to what they are talking about, or take part and speak yourself, but you cannot combine these two principles! At the same time, concentration on a specific goal, on contribution from the very beginning, is a key rule. Orientation to contribution, to achievement is the way to efficiency.

Chapter 4

An effective leader does everything to increase the return on the strengths of the organization everywhere and in everything. He knows that weaknesses cannot be relied upon. Making strengths as productive as possible is the true goal of any organization. Of course, one cannot overcome all the weaknesses that everyone invariably has. But it is in our power to make them insignificant.

Selection of employees based on their strengths. When making personnel decisions, the manager focuses on the presence of merits, and not on the absence of shortcomings in employees. A leader who promotes or staffs employees by focusing only on the weaknesses of people will, at best, get the most mediocre results. Strong people always have quite noticeable weaknesses. Experienced managers know that their subordinates are paid not to please their superiors, but to complete assigned tasks.

A good manager never asks, “Will we get along with this employee?” But he will certainly think: “What contribution can be expected from this employee?” He will also never ask, "What can't this worker do?" His question will be: “In what way can this worker excel?” In other words, when selecting personnel, experienced managers are guided by the high performance of applicants in one important area, and not by their overall performance. If this seems obvious to you, why are so few managers able to make the most of the strengths of others, especially their colleagues? The main reason lies in the fact that the direct task of the manager is to fill the vacancy, and not to select the person who is most capable of doing this job. Traditionally, they always start with an existing workplace, then look for a person for it. Acting in this way, one can come to the false principle of looking for the “most accommodating” worker, a person who does not pretend to anything. Observations show that such people tend to be mediocre.

Positions must be objective, that is, they must be determined by the task, not by the individual. You cannot change the work and duties of everyone just because a new person has come to some workplace. Fitting jobs to the individual leads unmistakably to favoritism and conformity. Managers who create excellent production teams usually do not have close relationships with their closest colleagues and subordinates. By selecting workers for their ability rather than personal likes or dislikes, these managers are guided by high performance rather than by universal agreement. To ensure results, they maintain a distance between themselves and their closest colleagues.

Effective leaders select employees based on their strengths rather than tailoring jobs to fit their personality. To do this, they follow four rules.

1. They should not assume that jobs and positions are created by nature itself or by the Lord God. They are the work of man with all his inherent shortcomings. Effective managers will always be wary of "impossible" jobs that a normal person can't do. The rule is quite simple: any job that turned out to be unbearable for several performers (moreover, those who distinguished themselves from the best side in their previous positions) should be recognized as unsuitable for everyone.

2. The second rule for selecting employees based on their strengths is to give responsibility to each position and exactingness in relation to the employee. If the work assignments are too “small”, it does not allow the best sides of the employees to come out. The young professional should ask himself as early as possible: “Will I be able to demonstrate all that I am capable of in this organization and in this area of work?” But he will not be able to ask himself this question, let alone answer it, if the work with which he began his activity is too limited, uncomplicated and structured in such a way as to somehow compensate for the lack of experience, instead of revealing all its possibilities. Many managers often complain that the zeal of young professionals dries up very quickly. However, such leaders have only themselves to blame: they extinguished the youthful ardor of young employees by instructing them to do tedious and unimportant work.

3. Effective managers know that it is necessary to start working with people with the disclosure and proper use of their potential, and not with the distribution of instructions to perform standard duties. It is for this reason that systems of attestation and assessment of knowledge of specialists have become so widespread. If a leader, following the recommendations of our rating system, proceeds from the shortcomings of his subordinates, this will spoil the relationship between them. Finding and highlighting shortcomings make further joint work almost impossible. It is not surprising, therefore, that very few managers prefer to use the existing grading system. The use of this erroneous tool leads to undesirable situations, as it pursues false goals. Only labor efficiency should be measured. Experienced managers usually develop their own forms of assessments, which differ sharply from those officially offered. As a rule, such forms begin with a listing of the performance that was expected from employees in their previous and current positions. Records of their actual achievements are also given here. This is followed by four questions:

What is this worker good at?
What functions, taking into account his previous achievements, can he successfully perform?
What should he learn to fully reveal his abilities?
Would I wish my children to work under him?
1. If yes, why?
2. If not, why not?

4. Effective managers know that in order to use strengths productively, it is often necessary to put up with weaknesses. Experienced managers know that two people with mediocre abilities cannot achieve the same results as one talented specialist. There are only three explanations for the "indispensability" of the worker:

He is in fact incompetent and can only survive on the basis of his lack of specific responsibility.
His strengths are used only to support his weaker boss, who is not able to make independent decisions.
His strengths are directed at delaying the solution of serious problems or at hiding their existence.

An indispensable condition for the advancement of a person in the service is his proven ability to effectively perform the functions required in this position. All other arguments, such as “he is irreplaceable…”, “he will not find a common language with the existing team…”, “he is very young…”, “we never put people who do not have experience in our field in such positions”, do not must be taken into account. It's not just that each job requires its best performer. A worker whose functional merits are proven should be given opportunities to reach their potential. Focusing on opportunities rather than problems in HR matters contributes to an effective organization as well as an atmosphere of enthusiasm and commitment. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of the manager to immediately remove from work anyone who does not manage to constantly show high results. To allow such people to remain in their positions is to corrupt others. This is highly unfair to the entire organization.

How to manage your boss. First of all, we must try to productively use its strengths. …there is nothing better for achieving success than a successful boss moving quickly up the career ladder. ... everyone who has ever taken a closer look at his surroundings has made the obvious conclusion that all people are divided into "readers" and "listeners".

Increasing your own efficiency. Effective managers worry about their limitations, but they are able to discover a great many things that they can accomplish. While others complain that they can't do one or the other, effective leaders prefer not to waste time and do what they know how to do best. An effective leader does not hide his weaknesses, he tries to be himself. In the sphere of human relations, the distance between the leaders and the middle peasants is a constant value. The high performance level of the leaders forces the middle peasants to catch up.

Chapter 5

The "secret" of efficiency lies in concentration and purposefulness. Effective managers always start with the first priority and do everything sequentially, that is, one thing in a certain period of time.

Before concentrating forces in one direction, effective managers try to get rid of the past which is no longer productive. They periodically review the programs of their activities and the activities of their colleagues, while asking the question: “If we have not done this so far, is it worth doing it now?” If the answer is no, then they reduce or even stop work in this direction. At the very least, managers try to avoid investing additional resources in already unproductive areas. Yesterday's actions and decisions, no matter how bold and wise they may be, inevitably turn into today's problems, crises and misunderstandings. At the same time, the successes of the past outlive their usefulness for a long time. Even more dangerous are activities that, despite all their prospects, have not brought the desired results. They sometimes "warm the vanity of the boss" and therefore are inviolable. A manager who wants to be effective himself and make his organization efficient must carefully monitor all programs, all areas of activity, all tasks. He must constantly ask himself: "Is it worth the effort?" The most effective means of supporting the new are the people themselves, who have proven their effectiveness. They are always more busy than they should be. To successfully solve new problems, the most valuable personnel should be freed from everything superfluous. New employees are recruited to develop and promote existing activities. Starting something new should be with people whose qualities are not in doubt, that is, with those who have extensive experience in this organization.

Systematic disposal of the old is the only means of introducing the new. There is no shortage of ideas in any organization I know of. We do not experience problems associated with "creative thoughts". But only a very small part of organizations can translate their worthy ideas into something practical. Everyone is too busy solving the problems of yesterday.

Priorities. It is very important to determine which tasks should be solved first of all, and which ones are left for “later”, as being of lesser importance. If the circumstances, and not the manager, make the decision, then the tasks are likely to remain unresolved. Because in this case there will be no time to implement the most difficult of them. Circumstances always prefer yesterday. Due to circumstances, leaders will not pay attention to what is being done outside the organization. Circumstances always tend to be most pronounced within the organization. They always choose what has already happened, not the future; Crisis, not Opportunity...

It is courage, not analysis, that dictates the truly important rules for setting priorities:

Focus on the future, not the past.
Focus on opportunities, not problems.
Choose your own direction, don't go with the flow with others.
Set high goals for yourself that allow you to make a big difference, not those that are “reliable” and easily achievable.

… in business, success is achieved not by those companies that seek to develop new types of products on an already existing organizational and technical basis, but by those that are aimed at introducing new technologies and types of production. As a rule, introducing something new in a limited area of action involves the same risk, complexity and uncertainty as if this implementation were about a large scope of actions.

Chapter 6. Elements of decision making

An effective leader is a leader who makes effective decisions. Effective managers do not tend to make many decisions. They only focus on the most important ones. They try to make those few important decisions that are at the highest level. conceptual understanding. Effective managers know when decisions should be based on principles and when they should be made pragmatically based on the merits of the circumstances. They know that the most difficult thing is choosing the right compromise, and therefore they strive to learn how to distinguish between a necessary compromise and an unnecessary one. They also know that the most time-consuming process is not the decision itself, but the implementation of it. Until it becomes a reality, it remains a good wish.

Examples of conceptual decision making by Theodore Weil (Bell Telephone System) and Alfred P. Sloan (General Motors).

The whole process of making an effective decision breaks down into elements.

1. The first question that a manager who wants to make an effective decision should ask is: “Is this situation typical or is it an exception to the rule?” Four types of events can be distinguished. First, there are really typical events, and individual cases serve here as symptoms. Secondly, there are problems that, while specific to individual companies, are of a general nature. Then there are the really exceptional, really unique challenges. Indeed, unique events occur quite rarely. When such an event occurs, the question should be asked: “Is this really an exception or just a manifestation of something new?” The initial manifestation of a new typical problem is the fourth and final category of events that must be dealt with in the decision-making process. All events, with the exception of truly unique ones, require fundamental decisions. They must be seen through the lens of rule, policy and principle. Truly unique events, however, require a highly individual approach. You can't make up rules for exceptions. The manager, who is faced with the task of developing an effective solution in his organization, first of all must determine which of the above four situations he is dealing with. An experienced manager knows that an incorrect classification of a situation leads to an incorrect decision. The most common mistake is to treat a typical situation as a series of unique events, that is, the manifestation of pragmatism in the absence of a principle and concept of a typical one. Another fairly common mistake is to treat a new event as a manifestation of an old problem to which the old rules apply.

An experienced leader assumes that the problem is typical. He also admits that the event that brought his attention is actually a symptom. He always tries to find the essence of the problem and does not stop at treating a single symptom. This also explains why an experienced responsible worker always strives to solve problems at the highest possible conceptual level. “If there are a lot of laws in a country, this indicates the incompetence of lawyers.” In such a country, they try to solve each problem as a unique phenomenon, and not as a special case that falls under general norms. Similarly, a manager who makes too many decisions is likely to be lazy and inefficient.

2. The second important element in the decision-making process is to clearly define what we want to achieve with this decision. What are the goals of our decisions? Do we set ourselves any minimum tasks? What conditions must our decisions satisfy? In science, these conditions are known as "marginal". For a solution to be effective, it must satisfy the boundary conditions and be adequate to the goal. Everyone can make the wrong decision and everyone makes such decisions from time to time. But we should all beware of decisions that do not satisfy the boundary conditions.

3. We must begin not with what seems acceptable, but with what seems to be true. This position is based on the fact that at the final stage of each action there is usually a need for a compromise. But if there is a fuzzy representation of the conditions that must be satisfied, it becomes impossible to distinguish the right trade-off from the wrong one. Often all this ends with the choice of the latter. Alfred Sloan: “... people can't choose the right compromise unless you first explain to them what is essentially 'right'. Do not waste time thinking about what is acceptable and what is not worth talking about, so as not to arouse resistance. … we gain nothing if we start with the question: “What is permissible?” By answering this question, we can lose the most important thing and lose the opportunity to find an effective (let alone correct) answer.

4. Implementation of the decision is the fourth main element of the decision making process. While the analysis of boundary conditions is the most difficult step in the decision-making process, turning it into an effective action requires a lot of time. No solution can be effective if implementation is not built into it from the very beginning.

When implementing a solution, several specific questions need to be answered: “Who needs to know about this solution? What action needs to be taken? Who should take this action? What should this action be so that the people responsible for it can implement it? In practice, the first and last questions are often neglected, with disastrous results.

If behavior is rewarded that is contrary to what is required to solve new problems, then it is quite possible to conclude that such behavior is welcomed by higher management.

5. Every responsible decision must be provided with feedback to check the correspondence between theory and practice. After all, even the most effective solutions eventually become obsolete. The military has long learned one simple thing - without checking the execution of orders, most of them remain unfulfilled. Warlords know that their own eyes are the surest test. The usual verification tools that presidents use—reports and reports—are not reliable means of feedback. Personal verification is also the best, if not the only, method for assessing the relevance of the assumptions underlying a given decision. If the audit reveals their inconsistency with the new realities, they should be reviewed. It's no secret that any packages sooner or later become obsolete. Reality is also a variable factor.

Chapter 7

The decision is a judgment. It's a choice between right and wrong. At best, a decision is a choice between "almost right" and "probably wrong," but much more often a decision is a choice between two courses of action that cannot be proven right. Most books that describe the process of making a decision say that "you need to start by looking for facts." But experienced managers know that it is necessary to start with something else - with opinions. In order to determine what is also "fact", it is necessary to find out the criteria of relevance. An effective solution does not follow from consistency of facts. It originates in the clash of different opinions, as well as in a serious analysis of possible alternatives.

The only accurate method that moves us to test opinion with reality is based on the clear conviction that everything starts with opinions. What to do with hypotheses, we know - they do not need to be doubted, they need to be tested. Perhaps the main idea should be expressed in the question: "What is the criterion of relevance?" The leader always proceeds from the fact that traditional measurements are not always what is needed. Indeed, if the traditional measures remained valid, then there would be no need to make decisions - a partial adjustment or adjustment would be quite enough. Traditional measurements essentially reflect yesterday's decisions. If there is a need to make a new decision, this, first of all, means that the measurement has lost its relevance.

The most effective method of finding an acceptable measurement is personal participation in the "feedback", only this communication should be carried out before a decision is made. Effective managers always seek to enlist alternative measurements in order to choose the one that is most appropriate.

Our vision of reality narrows if we have no alternatives. This is the primary reason why most experienced leaders discard the second basic commandment found in decision-making textbooks and seek to create an environment of controversy rather than unanimity. The first rule of decision-making might sound like this: "If there are no preliminary disagreements, it is impossible to develop an optimal solution."

There are three main points that speak in favor of making a decision in the face of objections and counterarguments. First, only in this way can a decision maker avoid becoming a prisoner of his organization. Everyone in the organization tries to impose their opinion on him. Everyone strives to make sure that exactly the decision that he considers necessary passes. Second, only disagreement can provide alternatives to the proposed solution. Above all, controversy is necessary to stimulate the imagination.

It should be assumed that a person who has expressed a seemingly clearly wrong judgment sees reality in a different light and seeks to solve a different problem. An effective leader will always ask, “What is this employee trying to achieve if he believes that his position is reliable, rational and reasonable?” Only having delved into the available options for judgments, he will think about who is right and who is not. Unfortunately, most people traditionally take as a starting point their vision of things as the only possible.

A leader who wants to make an effective decision asks, "Is this decision really necessary?" One alternative is always at your disposal - do nothing. But often you have to make a decision only because inaction can only worsen the situation. The same applies to favorable opportunities. Opportunity only exists for a limited time, and if it is not seized, it will disappear. In such cases, it is necessary to act, and this most often leads to radical changes. If the question "What happens if nothing is done?" you can answer that “everything is formed by itself”, then no intervention is required. Nor should one intervene in cases where the conditions are of no importance and do not significantly affect the course of events. Roman law, written almost two thousand years ago, says: De minimis non curat praetor - The praetor does not deal in trifles. Many responsible persons are still unaware of this saying.

I recommend conducting a comparative analysis of the risk associated with action, with the possible risk of inaction. There is no formula for the correct solution. But on the other hand, there are clear guidelines that facilitate decision-making in specific cases:

Take action if, all things considered, the benefits far outweigh the costs and risks.
You can act or not act; but don't shy away from and limit yourself to half-hearted solutions.

Let's assume that everything is ready for a decision. It is at this stage that most decisions are denied. Suddenly it turns out that it can be unpleasant, unpopular or difficult. Decisions, by their very nature, should not cause unpleasant emotions, however, most effective decisions leave an unpleasant aftertaste at first. It's safe to say what an effective leader won't do at this stage. He will not succumb to the temptation and will not require another study of this issue. He will not allow busy people to waste their time just to compensate for their own indecisiveness. The fact that the right decision is associated with some negative aspects, in principle, is not a reason for abandoning it. But unconscious anxiety or internal anxiety always acts as a limiter, even if only for a short time. As one of my friends, who knows how to make the most optimal decisions, says: “I always stop if I don’t see the situation clearly.”

Efficiency can be learned, but it cannot be taught.
Efficiency is not a "subject", but self-discipline!

Although the phrases in points 3 and 4 seem similar, they are not. Pay attention to the highlighted words.

From any leader, the correct performance of tasks is required - efficiency. Mentally brilliant people can be inefficient workers. Mind, imagination and knowledge only in combination with efficiency are embodied in results.

Until recently, the main problem of the organization was the productivity of manual workers. Over the past hundred years, we have learned how to measure it and have increased the productivity of an individual worker many times over. At the heart of the activities of modern organizations is intellectual work.

It cannot be measured by the criteria derived for physical labor;
Not quantifiable;
Not measured by costs incurred;
The contribution of managers does not depend on the number of subordinates;
Efficiency is results, not the amount of managerial work.

Books on management development present a portrait of the "manager of tomorrow" as "a man for all time", such people the world has always been in great need of. Universal Genius Required:

Ability to analyze;
To make decisions;
work with people;
Think creatively;
Good at math;
Understand the characteristics of your company and management structure.

Companies recruit people who, at best, have one of the desired qualities. Form the organization so that any person who is strong in one area or another can use his skills and abilities in the work. Bet on expanding the horizons of people's activities with the help of tools available to them. Do not count on a sharp jump in the development of personal abilities.

A distinctive feature of effective leaders is the ability to achieve a positive result in everything. Five habits that a leader needs to develop in order to work effectively:

Know what your time is spent on. Work on time management, increasing its efficiency.
Focus on accomplishments outside the organization. Focus not on getting the job done, but on the end result.
Develop strengths - your own, your bosses, colleagues, subordinates. Do not focus on weaknesses, do not start with tasks that you are not able to solve.
Focus on areas where high-quality work will lead to outstanding results. Set priorities and stick to them.
Make effective decisions. Right decisions are a system, a series of right steps in the right sequence. An effective decision is based on disagreement, not consensus. Quick decisions are wrong decisions. Solutions should be few, but they should be fundamental. What is needed is the right strategy, not inventive tricks.

Allocate your time

The resource of time is irreplaceable! Learn to manage your time - first determine as accurately as possible what it is actually spent on and reduce its unproductive use as much as possible. Consolidate the time you can control into larger blocks, don't do 20 blocks, do 5.

The time management process consists of three steps.

Time registration

Consider the amount of time spent on work, analyze your effectiveness.

The first step to improving the performance of a manager is to accurately record the actual time spent. Record your time spending regularly. Identify the most unproductive activities and get rid of them. Make a new work schedule after each check. Ask yourself diagnostic questions:

What happens if you don't do it at all? If the answer is "nothing" - abandon this case.
What activities that I am responsible for can someone else do and do as well or better than me?
What are my activities that waste time without adding value to my work?

Time Management

Make a plan for useful and necessary things. Poor management wastes your time in the first place.

Identify wasted time due to lack of system or shortsightedness. Recurring crises at work year after year are a good signal for action. The crisis that happened for the second time should not arise again.
Make sure that there is not too much workforce - this reduces efficiency. In such cases, workers spend more time “interacting” than working. If leaders spend more than a tenth of their time solving "human relations problems" - the team is too big.
Excessive number of meetings is an indicator of poor organization of work. The task should be holistic, do not break it into several subtasks, when responsibility is shared between many people and the information does not reach those who really need it. Meetings should not be the rule, but the exception to the rule.

Time Consolidation

Group tasks into large time blocks. Working time will be wasted if it is divided into blocks of 15-30 minutes. There are many ways to consolidate blocks of time. You can work from home one day a week; schedule meetings, checks, discussions of various problems for two days of the week; make a daily load schedule every morning, before leaving for work.

Discretionary time is spent doing things that bring the highest return. Estimate how much you have at your disposal. Set aside whole blocks of time for specific activities. Constantly review your schedule and get rid of the least productive activities.

Do not leave the plan on paper - work with it constantly.

Managers often have to deal with ineffective, but necessary things: talking with the best clients, participating in meetings of subordinates, providing information ... Try to entrust such matters to responsible subordinates. To achieve real results, the knowledge worker must focus on the achievements and goals of the work of the entire organization.

How can I contribute to the success of my organization?

Remember your responsibility to the company. A person who focuses all his attention on ongoing efforts and constantly emphasizes his authority and power is just a subordinate, no matter how high his status in the organization.

Leader's personal responsibilities

Every organization needs to excel in three main areas:

Immediate results;
Development of values and their confirmation;
Preparing employees for the future. If the organization fails in one of these areas, then it will first be in a state of stagnation, and then cease to exist. It is in these areas that the leader should contribute.

The inability or unwillingness to change in accordance with the requirements of a new position is a common reason for the failure of a leader. Not only the results to which its activities are directed change, but the overall importance of the three main parameters of successful work changes.

How to improve the efficiency of a specialist

It is necessary to give a specialist the opportunity to work effectively in his niche. He must clearly understand who will use the results of his work and what the user needs to know and understand in order to do his work productively. You need to take care of the practical applicability of your product. The main thing is not to produce generalists, "jacks of all trades."

Right interpersonal relationships

Proper interpersonal relationships arise when, in work and relationships with others, the leader focuses on his contribution to the common cause. Requirements for effective interpersonal relationships:

Communication;
Teamwork;
Self-development;
development of other people.

Efficient Assembly

The main rule is to initially focus the meeting on a specific result.

An effective leader must clearly know what he wants to achieve through a meeting, report or presentation. The content of such events should be carefully considered and communicated to the participants in advance.

How to strengthen strengths

To achieve results, use all the possible strengths of subordinates, partners, superiors and your own. Make your strengths as productive as possible.

Selection of employees based on their strengths

Recruitment rules:

1. A position that has already been replaced by two or three people who did an excellent job with their duties in previous jobs should be considered impossible. Change it.

2. Make every job big and meaningful. The job assignment should be so broad that all the strengths of the employee manifest themselves in full force - this will reveal his strengths in the candidate.

3. Start working with people by discovering and properly using their potential, rather than entrusting them with standard responsibilities. Do not try to assess the potential of an employee, potential is only a promise. Successful managers develop their own evaluation forms, which consist of listing the achievements of employees in their previous positions and four questions:

What does he do well?
What else can he do well, based on his abilities?
What does he need to learn to use his strengths to the fullest?
If I had children, would I like them to work for this person in the future? Why?

4. To use strengths, you need to be able to put up with weaknesses.

5. Avoid the dangerous trap of creating posts for a specific person.

How to manage your boss

The emphasis on the strengths of his leader, that is, the creation of conditions for him to act, which he is capable of, makes the work of both himself and his subordinate effective.

If your boss's strength is political ability in a position where politics is critical, first introduce him to the political aspect of the situation. He will understand what is at stake, and effectively use his strengths, taking into account the new direction of politics.

Increasing your own efficiency

Do what you do best, constantly look for what else you can do.

An effective leader always observes his own work, its results and tries to track general trends: how to work more effectively with the audience or what time of day is better to write presentations, take quick notes or carefully work out each proposal.

To be effective, it is necessary to expand opportunities and limit problems. The standards for the performance of a group of people are set by the example of a leader - your performance should be based only on your strengths.

Everything has its time

The main secret of efficiency is concentration. Do the most important things first and never do more than one important thing at the same time. Rigid self-discipline, iron willpower and the ability to say “no” are needed. This will help you in solving a huge number of problems.

To do one thing in one period of time means to do it quickly. People who are able to do a lot of things, different in nature, take turns doing them.

Letting go of the burden of yesterday

Systematic getting rid of the old is the only way to effectively start a new one. Get rid of past failures; yesterday's successes that have ceased to be productive; activities that did not bring the desired results.

The problem with established organizations is not lack of creativity. Often all their employees are too busy solving the problems of yesterday. Stimulating creativity is successful even in the most limited, bureaucratic structures, if programs and activities are regularly checked for their relevance and any unproductive activities are immediately stopped.

Priority and other issues

Setting priorities is a simple task. It is more difficult to identify non-priority tasks that should be postponed and strictly adhere to your decision. Courage, not analysis, dictates the really important rules for setting priorities:

Choose the future, not the past;
Focus on the opportunity, not the problem;
Choose your own direction, and do not go with the flow, following the winners;
Set goals that will give visible results, not those that are achieved safely and easily.

Impose your own prioritization of tasks, despite the limitations of time and circumstance. This is the leader's only hope of becoming the master of his time and circumstances, and not their slave.

Decision making process

Effective leaders think in strategic and big terms. Do not set yourself the goal of solving current problems, do not make too many decisions. Focus only on the essentials. Don't try to make quick decisions.

It is necessary to know when the decision should be based on principle, and when - proceed from the needs of the moment and pragmatism. Most of the time in this process is spent not on making decisions, but on putting them into practice. The implementation of an effective solution should be simple and as close as possible to the capabilities of the average worker.

Effective Decision Making Process:

Ask yourself: "Is this situation typical, or is it an exception to the rule?" Solve a common characteristic problem by establishing a principle. Exceptions need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Clearly define what exactly should be achieved with a particular solution. What goals does it pursue? What are the minimum tasks before him? What conditions must it satisfy? An effective solution must be consistent with the goals, otherwise it is inefficient and inappropriate.
Start with what is right, not what is acceptable. At the end, you still have to compromise. If a person does not know how to meet the boundary conditions, he cannot choose between the right and wrong compromise, and this often leads to errors.
The implementation of the solution takes the most time. No solution will be effective if mechanisms for its implementation are not developed from the very beginning. No decision can be considered made until someone is held accountable for its implementation. Turning a decision into action requires answers to several questions: “Who should know about this decision?” “What actions should be taken?” “Who will have to take them?” did you manage to complete it?" Actions must be appropriate to the abilities of the people who will be entrusted with their implementation.
Provide a feedback system to continually review the implementation of the solution and check against the implementation plan. Effective feedback requires organized information, numbers, and data. The leader must personally check how his decisions are being implemented, otherwise his activities will be ineffective.

Effective Solutions

Any decision is a choice between options. To make an effective decision, collect the maximum number of opinions, supported by facts. Develop in yourself and in your colleagues the habit of determining what to pay attention to, what to study and what to check. This is the basis of any effective solution.

An effective decision is not the result of a consensus in the assessment of the available facts, it is the result of conflicts of different opinions, as well as a serious analysis of a variety of options.

The development of a suitable evaluation mechanism is associated with a certain risk. In order to make a judgment, one must have options to choose from. Only when there are options can we hope to make an informed choice.

The first rule of decision making is don't make a decision until you hear opinions that contradict yours. Why, when making a decision, you should insist on counterarguments:

This is the only way to prevent a situation where the decision maker becomes a prisoner of the organization. The way to break free from prejudice is to ensure that objections are documented and carefully considered.
Only disagreement provides alternatives to the proposed option. A decision without an alternative is just a desperate gambler's move, no matter how carefully thought out. Look at opposition as a vehicle for thinking about solutions.

Every decision is an intervention in a well-established system. A good leader will not take risks and make unnecessary decisions. A decision should be made if the situation is likely to worsen without it. Opportunities often lead to improvement rather than radical change.

You are ready to make a decision if: the requirements are thought through, the options are explored, the risks and benefits are weighed, but this is not enough. In this situation, a successful leader must resist the temptation and conduct research on this issue again.

Chapter 1 Efficiency Can Be Learned

The manager's job is to be efficient. Whether he is in business or working in a hospital, in a government office or in a trade union committee, a university or an army unit, he is expected to perform tasks correctly, that is, to be effective.

Nevertheless, leadership positions are sometimes occupied by workers who do not have high efficiency, although among them there are many who have a high intellectual level and creative imagination. These people are usually well informed and have great knowledge. However, there is no direct connection between these qualities of a leader and his effectiveness as an employee. Even the most gifted people can be surprisingly inefficient; they sometimes do not understand that thanks to one ability it is impossible to achieve any significant success in work. They do not realize that talent can only contribute to efficiency through purposeful work. Conversely, in every organization there are high-performing employees who do not have special talents. While some frantically rush about, imitating vigorous activity, which sometimes others take for a "creative spark", others, step by step, slowly move towards the intended goal and reach it first, like the turtle in the famous old fable.

Intelligence, imagination and knowledge are essential qualities, but only in combination with efficiency will they be embodied in results. Taken on their own, they only set the bar for what can be achieved.

WHY ARE EFFICIENT MANAGERS NEEDED?

The answer to this question seems self-evident. But then why is the problem of efficiency given so little attention in our time, when whole mountains of books and articles have been written, it would seem, on all aspects of the activities of management workers?

One of the reasons for the neglect of this problem is that efficiency is a special technology applied by a knowledge worker within an organization. Until recently, there were few such organizations in the world.

Physical labor requires efficiency and productivity. In other words, the manual worker must be able to correctly perform the tasks assigned to him, but their adequacy does not concern him. The activity of a manual worker can always be assessed by the quantity and quality of products that can be easily identified and accounted for, such as shoes. Over the past century, mankind has learned to determine the effectiveness and quality of physical labor. This helped to increase the productivity of an individual worker many times over.

Previously, the manual worker, whether a production worker or a soldier, prevailed in all organizations. The need for effective workers was small: the entire management process was concentrated in the hands of a few administrators, "bosses" who give orders to their subordinates. These leaders constituted such an insignificant fraction of the working-age population that their effectiveness was not questioned. They were those few people whose natural qualities enabled them to see what others could only comprehend with great difficulty.

This state of affairs was typical not only for production and the army. It seems incredible to us today that the American "government" during the Civil War more than a hundred years ago consisted of only a handful of functionaries. Under President Lincoln, there were less than fifty people under the Secretary of War, most of whom were not "managers" and not politicians, but telegraph employees. At the beginning of this century, the entire government apparatus of President Theodore Roosevelt could well be accommodated in one of the modern buildings on the main street in Washington.

Medical institutions at the beginning of the century did not have the “health professionals”—radiologists, laboratory assistants, nutritionists, therapists, social workers, and other specialists—without whom modern hospitals cannot be imagined. Moreover, for every hundred patients, there are currently up to 250 medical workers of various profiles. The hospital staff consisted of several nurses, cooks, maids and cleaners. The only knowledge worker was the attending physician, who was assisted by a nurse.

In other words, relatively recently, the main problem in any organization was the effectiveness of the manual worker who performed the tasks assigned to him. Knowledge workers were in a clear minority.

Knowledge workers made up only a small part of all those employed in one organization or another. Mostly they worked in positions that required special skills, at best with clerks. Their effectiveness, or lack thereof, affected only themselves.

Currently, institutions based on intellectual work occupy a leading place in the life of society. Modern society is a society of large organized institutions. In each of them, including the army, the dominant role is played by a man of mental labor, relying on his head, and not on the muscles and sleight of hand. The proportion of workers who specially learned to use their theoretical knowledge, rather than physical strength, is growing. Their effectiveness is measured by their contribution to the organizations where they work.

Now efficiency can no longer be taken for granted, and it can no longer be neglected.

The system of measurement and evaluation - from the organization of production and accounting to quality control - used in relation to physical labor is not applicable to intellectual labor. Is it possible to imagine anything less attractive and productive than a design bureau creating ingenious technical developments of products that no one needs? That is why working on the right product is a measure of the effectiveness of intellectual work. Intellectual, creative activity does not fit any measures applied in relation to physical labor.

The creative worker is alien to petty guardianship. He can only help. At the same time, he must direct himself to the fulfillment of the tasks set, that is, to efficiency.

More recently, a cartoon appeared in The New Yorker magazine depicting the door of some institution, on which hung a sign: "Smith, Commercial Director, Ayako. Soap Sales Company." The walls of the institution were completely bare, except for the conspicuous inscription "I think. "In the office, with his feet on the table, a man was sitting and smoking a cigar. A little further away stood two elderly gentlemen, one of whom asked the other: "How can you be sure that Mr. Smith is thinking about soap? .."

Indeed, you never know what a knowledge worker is thinking. At the same time, thinking is his field of activity, his work.

The motivation of an employee engaged in intellectual activity depends on his efficiency, on his ability to achieve his goals. If his work is devoid of efficiency, then very soon his desire to work and bring concrete benefits disappears and he turns into an official serving his time at work from 9 to 17.

A worker with theoretical knowledge does not produce anything that could be effective in itself. It does not manufacture physically measurable products such as shoes, machine parts, etc. It produces knowledge, ideas, and information. By itself, this "product" is useless. Its practical implementation occurs in the next stage, when someone will use it in order to achieve concrete results. The most brilliant idea, if not put into practice, will remain meaningless. Thus, a worker engaged in intellectual, creative activity must do something that a manual worker does not need to do. He must make the work efficient. Unlike the shoe manufacturer, he does not have to worry about the utility of the results of his activities.

The thinking, creative worker is the very "factor of production" that allows the highly developed areas of the world - the United States, Western Europe, Japan, and increasingly the Soviet Union - to become and remain competitive.

The most typical example in this respect is the United States. Education is precisely the area in which America is most competitive. There are many flaws in the American education system, but it is nonetheless more powerful and larger than the systems that less wealthy countries can afford. Education can be considered the most expensive CAP investment we know of. The social costs associated with the preparation of a doctor of natural sciences are estimated at between 100,000 and 200,000 dollars. Even a young man who graduated from college and does not have any special professional skills is valued at 50 thousand dollars or more. Only a very wealthy society can afford it.