高層:變成壞老闆的5個好方法
Next time you find yourself grumbling about what a jerk your boss is, just think: This person could be giving you a valuable negative example. "I've worked for some horrible managers and some great ones," says Steve Pogorzelski, the CEO of online-marketing metrics powerhouse ClickFuel. He's grateful to the worst of them, he adds, "for showing me what to avoid."
下一次抱怨老闆有多混蛋的時候，不妨這樣想：這個人可是一個非常寶貴的反面典型。在線營銷指標評估網站ClickFuel的CEO史蒂夫?鮑格茲爾斯基說：“我曾爲各種老闆工作過，有的老闆很糟糕，有的則是非常優秀的管理者。”而對於那些糟糕的上司，他也心懷感激，因爲“他們讓我知道未來應該避免哪些問題。”Before joining ClickFuel, Pogorzelski spent 10 years at (MWW), including two years as group president of Monster International, from 2005 to 2007, during which he helped revenues jump by 60% to $488 million. As an investor in tech startups, whose founders he advises, "I'm still learning every day," he adds. Not sure whether your fearless leader qualifies as a bad boss? Pogorzelski has pinpointed five things bad bosses do.
加入ClickFuel之前，鮑格茲爾斯基曾在招聘網站任職十年.2005年至2007年期間，他還曾擔任過該公司集團總裁。期間，在他的帶領下，公司收入上漲了60%，達到4.88億美元。作爲一名科技初創企業投資人，他經常爲初創企業的創始人提供諮詢。他說：“我每天仍然在不斷學習。”你的那位大無畏的領導是不是一位糟糕的老闆呢？且看鮑格茲爾斯基總結出的“糟糕老闆5症狀”。1. Discourage risk-taking. As an intern at a publishing company a couple of decades ago, Pogorzelski recalls, "they told me I wasn't management material because I wasn't cautious and conservative enough." His penchant for questioning the status quo was more welcome later on at Monster, where "I had a great boss who encouraged risk," he says. "The only rule was, if you're going to take a chance and make a mistake, do it fast -- so you can change direction fast." Much of Monster International's growth spurt came from acquisitions, especially in Asia: "Every one of them was a big risk, but they all worked out."
1. 禁止承擔風險。回憶起幾十年前，自己在一家出版公司實習時，鮑格茲爾斯基說：“他們說我不是當管理者的料，因爲我不夠謹慎和保守。”他喜歡質疑現狀的嗜好後來在Monster公司更受歡迎。他說：“在Monster，我有一位很了不起的上司，他鼓勵冒險。唯一的規則是，如果你要冒險一試，而且可能會犯錯，那就一定要動作迅速——這樣你還有餘地，可以更快地調整方向。”Monster International的急劇擴張大部分都源於收購，尤其是在亞洲的收購：“每一筆收購都存在巨大的風險，結果全都成功帶來了回報。”
Often, he says, bad bosses "squelch risk -- even small risks -- because they fear being shown up by someone who has a better idea. But great people under you push you up. They don't push you out."
他說，糟糕的老闆經常“壓制風險——即便是很小的風險，因爲他們擔心想法更好的人會超過他們。但實際上，優秀的下屬會推動上司更進一步，而不是擠掉上司的位置。”2. Manage by command-and-control. At that publishing company where he interned, Pogorzelski recalls, bosses' command-and-control style meant that "nobody did anything more than was absolutely required, because you'd be punished for showing any initiative."
2. 命令與控制式的管理。鮑格茲爾斯基回憶稱，在那家出版公司實習時，老闆命令與控制式的管理方式意味着，“除了遵守死命令之外，沒有人會多幹活，因爲只要員工表現出一點積極性，便會受到懲罰。”Crushing creativity may have worked all right back in the days when the pace of technological and economic change was glacial, and people expected to stay at one company for decades. "But now, employees are loyal to their own careers, not to any one company," he says. "If you fall back on command-and-control, your best people will leave. Anyone who performs well under that kind of boss is not an A player."
在科技與經濟變革極其緩慢的時代，打壓創造力的做法或許還能行得通，因爲人們都希望能在一家公司呆上幾十年。“可如今，員工只會忠於自己的職業，而不是哪一家公司，”他說。“如果老闆採取命令與控制式的管理方式，最優秀的員工肯定會離開。在這種老闆手下即便表現好的員工，也一定不會是最優秀的人才。”One symptom of a command-and-control culture, he adds, is when "people are surprised by their annual performance evaluations. That shouldn't happen, because a boss should be coaching and giving feedback constantly." In his experience, the most effective coaches pull no punches: "If people know you have their best interests at heart, they can take honest criticism no matter how it's given. There's no need to sugarcoat it."
他補充說，命令與控制式管理文化的另外一種症狀則表現在“年度績效評估令員工大吃一驚的時候。本來這種事不應該發生，因爲老闆應該不斷給員工提供指導與反饋。”按照他的經驗，最有效的教練從來都是毫不留情的：“如果大家知道，你真誠地批評完全是爲了他們的最大利益，他們應該都能夠接受，不論你採取哪種方式。沒有必要粉飾批評。”3. Reward tenure and personal loyalty over merit. "I've worked for some bosses who demanded personal loyalty and rewarded sycophants, not performance," Pogorzelski says. "But the best bosses believe everyone's main loyalty should be to the customer, and they reward you based on what you do, not who you know."
3. 功過不分，任人唯親。鮑格茲爾斯基稱：“許多我之前的老闆會要求對個人的忠誠，對‘馬屁精’會加獎賞，卻不管績效如何。而最優秀的老闆則相信，員工主要的忠誠應該獻給客戶，他們會根據員工做過什麼進行獎勵，而不是你認識什麼人。”As for tenure, a long stint with one employer is now just as outdated as command-and-control management, he believes. "Unless you've been promoted a lot or faced a series of new challenges, staying a long time in one place is almost a negative." That idea is more accepted in the U.S. than in some other cultures, he adds: "At Monster International, we found that it was hard to convince European managers, who are used to a whole different tradition, that just being there for a certain number of years didn't guarantee a promotion."
而關於任期，他相信，長期只爲一個人打工，就像命令與控制式的管理模式一樣，早已經過時了。“除非你得到了許多升職機會，或者面臨一系列全新的挑戰，否則長時間待在一家公司，通常都不會有積極的效果。”他補充說，和在其他國家相比，這種觀點在美國更容易被接受。“在Monster International，我們發現，要想讓歐洲管理者相信，在這裏工作幾年不一定能得到升職，是非常困難的，因爲他們習慣了一種截然不同的傳統。”4. Emphasize anecdotes over analytics. "I've worked with a few bad bosses who made decisions based on anecdotal information rather than hard data," says Pogorzelski. "But given the amount and the speed of data available now, there's no good reason to do that. Incompetent managers prefer to rely on anecdotes because they can always find someone to tell them what they want to hear, rather than what the facts are."
4. 偏信傳聞，忽視分析。鮑格茲爾斯基說道：“我以前跟過的幾位糟糕老闆，會根據道聽途說的信息制定決策，而不是實實在在的數據。考慮到當下可用信息的數量和傳遞速度，他們更不應該這樣做。能力不足的管理者之所以喜歡小道消息，是因爲他們總能找到一個人，告訴他們自己想聽的話，而不是確鑿的事實。”Beware, he says, of "a boss who starts a meeting by saying, 'If the data are to be believed ... ' or 'I know what the data show, but everybody thinks ... ' My answer to that is, 'Bring me everybody, and we'll see.'" One of his all-time worst bosses, he adds, "made a major product decision based on an isolated anecdote he heard that suggested the product didn't work well, when the analytics showed that it did. The changes he made as a result were disastrous for the business."
要注意下面的情況，他提醒誰：“比如老闆在開會時，開場白就是‘如果相信這些數據……’或者‘我知道這些數據代表着什麼，但每個人都認爲……’對這個問題，我會這樣回答：‘把每個人都請來，讓我們看個究竟。’”他說，有一位史上最糟糕的老闆，“聽到一點傳聞，稱某款產品表現不好，雖然分析結果與傳聞內容截然相反，但他還是根據那條孤立的傳聞，做出了一項重大的產品決策。結果，他做出的改變讓公司落入萬劫不復的深淵。”5. Consider management a project or an end result. "Bad bosses see managing people as an event, rather than a process," Pogorzelski notes. "A once-a-year performance evaluation is an event. But real management is something that goes on every day, where you're constantly finding occasions to give feedback."
5. 將管理視爲一個項目或最終結果。鮑格茲爾斯基發現：“糟糕的老闆會將人員管理視爲結果，而不是過程。一年一次的績效評估是結果，但真正的管理應該體現在日常工作當中。管理者應該不斷尋找機會給員工提供反饋。”Listening helps, too. Pogorzelski observes that key people often start job hunting because "they're uncertain what's next for them in this company. If you create an environment where they feel they can tell you what they're hoping for -- international experience, for example -- you're less likely to lose them."
傾聽也能有所幫助。鮑格茲爾斯基發現，許多優秀員工之所以開始尋找新工作，通常是因爲“他們不確定未來在這家公司會有怎樣的發展。如果管理者能創造一種環境，讓員工感覺他們可以將自己所期望的條件提出來，比如國際經歷等，優秀員工離開的可能性便會大幅降低。”In the tech startups he advises, Pogorzelski says, "I recommend to top management that theycoach the people under them as often as possible, because coaching is a gift. If you put it that way -- if you say, 'I'm telling you this because I care about your success' -- people will respond by giving you their best work." Ideally, he adds, the coaching goes both ways. As a CEO interviewing potential new hires, "I look for people who will tell me I'm wrong. I want subordinates who aren't afraid to bring me bad news."
鮑格茲爾斯基稱，在自己提供諮詢建議的科技初創公司，“我會建議公司高層儘可能經常指導下屬，因爲對員工來說，來自高層的指導就像是一件禮物。比如，如果管理者這樣說：‘我之所以告訴你這個，是因爲我在乎你的成功。’下屬就會以最佳表現來回報公司。”他補充道，理想情況下，指導應該是雙向的。作爲一名經常面試新員工的CEO，“我喜歡那些會直言我做錯了的人。我希望下屬敢於直言，不怕告訴我壞消息。"
