标记档案: 工作与生活的平衡

When the Going Gets Tough, Turn Around!

Elton John is right, sorry is the hardest word. It is hard to admit that one has been wrong. Harder still is to find a way forward, a way to correct one’s past mistakes. It often involves backtracking.

But when it comes to hard-headed business decisions, backtracking may often be the only thing to do. It makes sense to cut further losses when there is little point in throwing good money after bad. Such containment efforts are routine events in most establishments.

The biggest loss containment effort that I had a personal stake in happened in the US in the early nineties. I began noticing its worrying escalation in a hotel room in Washington DC. I was student delegate in the annual conference of the American Physical Society (APS). Despite the happy APS atmosphere (where many graduate students find their future placements) and the beautiful pre-cherry-blossom weather, I was a worried man because I had just seen a TV commercial that said, “Ten billion dollars for a particle accelerator??!! What the heck is it any way?”

The ten billion dollar project under attack was the so-called Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) in Texas, which was eventually shut down in 1993. The cancellation came in spite of a massive initial investment of about two billion dollars.

对我来说,, this cancellation meant that more than two thousand bright and experienced physicists would be looking for jobs right around the time I entered the job market. This concern represented my personal stake in the project; but the human impact of this mammoth backtracking was much deeper. It precipitated a minor recession in the parts of Dallas to the south of the Trinity River.

Similar backtracking, though at a much smaller scale, may happen in your organization as well. Let’s say you decided to invest two million dollars in a software system to solve a particular business problem. Half a million dollars into the project, you realize that it was a wrong solution. What do you do?

It may look obvious that you should save the company a million and a half by stopping the project. This decision is exactly what the collective wisdom of the US Congress arrived at in 1993 regarding the SSC. But it is not that simple. Nothing in real life is that simple.

Corporate backtracking is a complex process. It has multiple, often interconnected, aspects that have to be managed with skill.

If you decide to backtrack, what does it say about your business acumen? Will it trigger a backlash from the top management accusing you of poor judgment? 换句话说, will your name be so much in the mud that you would find it impossible to secure a job and support your family?

Let’s say it really wasn’t your fault and you had valid arguments to convince everybody of your innocence. Would that make it simple enough to pull the plug on the project? In all probability, it would not, because all big projects involve other people, for no man is an island. Stopping a project half-way through would probably mean sacking the whole project team.

This human cost is something we have to be aware of. It is not always about dollars and cents. If you are kind soul, you would have to move the team to some other (potentially unproductive) project, thereby eroding the savings that would’ve accrued from stopping the project. Wouldn’t it have been better to have continued with the original project, doomed though it was?

In most corporate cases, it will turn out to be wise to shutdown doomed projects. But don’t underestimate the costs involved. They are not always counted in monitory terms, but have human dimensions as well.

It is far wiser never to embark on dubious projects. When you must get involved in uncertain projects, review your exit options carefully. 例如, would it be possible to reshape the project in a different but still salvageable direction?

And if and when you do have to shut them down, do it with decisiveness. Do it with skill. But most importantly, do it with decency and compassion.

Rumour Mills

员工寻求见解他们组织的标题. 他们应该, 因为什么他们的组织做对他们的福祉有直接影响. 如果您的组织正计划紧缩开支 50% 其工作人员, 例如, 你最好开始寻找新工作的时候了.

谁是你把当你松的信息? 你的管理会让你听他们的. From the employee’s perspective, 这可能不是最聪明的举动. 不过别着急, 还存在另一种.

有一个地下城. 并行企业备忘录和通信会议的世界, 这个传言城市交易信息, 经常产生它需要.

员工涌向谣言钢厂, 没出其固有的恶意对他们的雇主, 但由于有根有据和相互不信任. 管理趋于谨慎 (因此,比少偷拍) 他们的公告, 而在 80% 办公室传言最终被证明准确, 一些研究表明,.

让我们来假设情况. 假设五年前, 你的CEO走上讲台,并宣布将有绝对没有裁员. 你们有多少人会相信的? 这些谁相信几乎肯定会希望他们听了小道消息,而不是.

这是一个典型的管理团队由遭受信用差距可以解决,虽然只开放和坦诚的沟通. Therein lies the rub. 管理不能总是像坦诚,因为他们想成为. 和, 他们肯定不能像偷拍的员工希望他们能够.

缺乏坦诚的在不确定的环境滋生谣言. 谣言, 在心理学定义, 与广泛影响的假设. 他们比比皆是当管理拒绝与战略信息信任员工. 这种缺乏信任和信息,使他们别无选择,只能解释自己的发展. 在这样的解释躺在办公室的谣言的起源.

谣言不与八卦混淆. 虽然传言是基于猜想和呈现未来, 公司范围内的不测事件, 八卦能被闲置或针对个人的恶意. 和八卦通常作为事实. 在竞争激烈的设置, 八卦可以造成对不知情的受害者造成不可挽回的损害.

一旦传言可信度达到一个高水平, 高级官员将被迫说话. 但会谈必须是坦诚和认真的. 而且它必须是及时. 如果他们等待太久, 他们在tête-A-tête尝试将类似的损害控制微弱的尝试. 而如果谈话是陈词滥调©S和修辞仅仅洪流, 这将被视为为了掩饰潜在的灾难性变化. 事实上, 这样的弱通信燃料更谣言比它镇住了.

由于关键的工作相关的信息通常流下来小道消息, 员工要谈. 任何管理的唯一安全可靠的策略是利用地下流言 — 经典 “如果你德卡尼亚€™吨贝娅塔€™EM, Joina€™在”范式.

如果您是高层的一部分, 这里是你可以做什么. 流通尽可能多的准确和及时的信息,你可能可以. 如果你不能做到这一点正式通过正规渠道, 尝试非正式的, 如午餐和茶水间. 这边走, 你可以把谣言钢厂,以满足您的目的,而不是让他们横行.

不要小看小道消息的力量, 恐怕所有的企业传播的努力应前功尽弃.

压力和分寸感

我们如何应对压力, 因为它是不可避免的在我们的企业存在? 对抗压力共同策略包括运动, 瑜伽, 冥想, 呼吸技巧, 重新设置优先级等系列. 要添加到这个列表, 我有自己的秘密武器,战斗压力,我想与大家分享. 这些武器可能太有力; 所以使用它们小心.

我的一个秘密的战术是发展分寸, 无害的,因为它听起来. 比例可在数字方面. 让我们先从个体数, 例如. 每天早上,, 当我们来上班, 我们看到成千上万的面孔浮动由, 几乎所有前往各自的工作岗位. 花点时间看看他们 — 每个都有自己的个人想法和关心, 忧虑和压力.

他们每个人, 唯一真正的压力是自己. 一旦我们知道,, 为什么我们认为我们自己任何压力更重要的比别人的? 个人的绝对数量升值强调在我们身边, 如果我们停下来想想, 将会把我们的忧虑观点.

在我们的规模而言比例也有所思考. 我们占据着相当大的建设的一小部分是我们的工作场所. (据统计, 本专栏的读者是不太可能占据了很大的角落办公室!) 该建筑占地空间的一小部分,这是我们所钟爱的城市. 所有的城市是如此的渺小,世界地图上的点,通常是它们的大小言过其实.

我们的世界, 大地, 是尘土一个斑点从火球几英里, 如果我们认为太阳的任何可以想象大小的火球. 太阳和太阳系是如此的渺小,如果你把我们的银河系的图片作为您的PC上的壁纸, 他们将有几千本土明星共享像素! 而我们的星系 — 不要让我开始上! 我们有无数的数十亿人. 我们的存在 (我们所有的烦恼和压力) 几乎是不可思议的小.

我们存在的渺小不限于空间; 它延伸到时间,以及. 时间是棘手的,当涉及到分寸. 我们认为宇宙作为 45 岁. 多久你认为我们的存在是在规模? 几秒钟!

我们创建了星尘埃, 最后一个单纯的宇宙瞬间, 然后转回到星尘. 在这段时间内的DNA的机器, 我们运行未知的遗传算法, 这是我们错了我们的愿望和成就, 或应力和挫折. 放松! 不用担心, 要开心!

肯定, 你可能会训斥,如果该报告不出去的明天. 或, 你的供应商可能会不高兴,您的付款再次推迟. 或, 你的同事可能会发送出陷害电子邮件 (和密送你的老板) 如果你得罪他们. 但, 你不明白, 在这种心态麻木堆积如山的宇宙, 没关系丝毫. 在物联网的大计划, 你的压力是不是连静态噪声!

参数保持压力所有的水平取决于一个考虑不周的概念,强调艾滋病的生产力. 它不. 关键的生产力是欢乐的工作态度. 当你停止担心谴责和背刺和赞誉, 并开始享受你做什么, 生产力恰好. 我知道这听起​​来有点理想化, 但我最富有成效件作品发生的方法. 享受我做的是一个理想,我会拍的任何一天.

知识筒仓,,en,我们知道很多,,en,我的意思是整个人类,,en,我们非常了解,我们中的任何人都不可能知道我们全部知识的一小部分,,en,这就是我们专注的原因,,en,专业化很好,,en,它让我们深入到特定领域的努力,,en,但是以牺牲广泛的一切为代价,,en,专业化是专业人士的期望,,en,如果你发现你的牙医是你,你不会很开心,,en,一位着名的哲学家也是如此,,en,或者你的孩子的耳鼻喉科外科医生秘密地在当地大学教授天体物理学,,en,潜伏在我们追求超级专业化知识库的习惯背后隐藏着危险,,en,一个明显的危险是丧失协同作用和潜在的创新,,en,一个例子,,en

We know a lot. 通过 “我们,” I mean humanity as a whole. We know so much that it is impossible for any one of us to know more than a fraction of our total knowledge. This is why we specialize.

Specialization is good. It lets us cut deep into a specific field of endeavor; but at the expense of a broad overview of everything, 自然. Specialization is expected of professionals. You wouldn’t be happy if you found out that your dentist is, 事实上, a well-known philosopher as well. Or that your child’s ENT surgeon secretly teaches astrophysics in the local university.

Isn’t there a danger lurking behind our habit of demanding super specialized silos of knowledge? One obvious danger is the loss of synergy and potential innovation. A case in point — 欧洲核研究组织的粒子物理学家,,en,面临访问不同计算机和网络上的各种文件的问题,,en,熟悉计算问题,,en,物理学家提供了描述文件的好方法,,en,如现在所知,,en,资源,,en,并突然第一个URL,,en,通用资源定位器,,en,出生,,en,其余的是历史,,en,我们有万维网,,en,互联网,,en,十五年后,,en,你有电子商务和YouTube,,en,如果欧洲核子研究中心坚持认为他们的物理学家只做物理学并将计算问题留给IT部门,,en,互联网可能根本没有实现,,en,它可能需要很长时间才能实现,,en,专业化的需求不仅限于个人,,en (欧洲核子研究中心) faces the problem of accessing various files on different computers and networks. Being conversant in computing issues, the physicist devices a nice way of describing the file (或, as it is known now, the resource) and suddenly the first URL (Universal Resource Locator) is born. The rest is history — we have the World Wide Web, the Internet. Fifteen years later, you have e-commerce and YouTube!

If CERN had insisted that their physicists do only physics and leave their computing problems to the IT department, the Internet may not have materialized at all. 或, it may have taken a lot longer to materialize.

The need for specialization is not limited to individuals. 它以典型的劳动分工形式(如人力资源)渗透到现代工作场所,,en,IT和业务,,en,这个部门已经运行良好很多年了,,en,但每隔一段时间,,en,这种孤岛的专业知识变得如此分散和分散,以至于该组织忽略了其基本目标,,en,孤岛里的人开始互相攻击,,en,争夺资源和认可,,en,而不是合作共同获得成功,,en,一个典型组织中最常见的贱民是IT部门,,en,如果系统中有任何问题出现问题,这些可怜的人总是会大喊大叫,,en,但是,当一切工作正常,,en,没有人注意到它们,,en,在当今无处不在的电脑素养时代,,en,为什么不承担一些系统责任,以便在PC故障排除中的周转时间,,en, 金融, IT and Business. This division has worked well for ages. But every once in a while, the expertise in such silos becomes so split and scattered that the organization loses sight of its basic objective. People in the silos begin work against each other, competing for resources and recognition, rather than collaborating for common success.

The most common pariah in a typical organization is the IT department. These poor folks always get shouted at if anything at all goes wrong in the system. But when everything is working fine, nobody even notices them. In today’s age of ubiquitous computer literacy, why not assume a bit of system responsibility so that the turnaround time in PC troubleshooting (从而提高生产力,,en,可以改进,,en,我们知道为什么,,en,谈到电脑,,en,对于事情可能会有多糟糕没有限制,,en,正如IT谚语所说的那样,,en,人非圣贤孰能,,en,但要完全弄脏事情需要一台电脑,,en,最终用户可能会将系统搞得如此完整,以至于即使是IT部门也是如此,,en,一种罕见的商品,,en,可能会发现恢复正常状态是不可能的,,en,为了对抗这种自我毁灭,,en,虽然是善意的,,en,趋势,,en,IT部门已经走向另一个极端,使得它变得如此官僚化,几乎不可能得到任何帮助,,en,审计人员是另一个在高度监管的组织中受到严厉批评的组织,,en,他们吃力不讨好的工作就是看看每个人的肩膀,并确保他们遵守游戏规则,,en) can be improved?

事实上, we know why. When it comes to computers, there is no limit to how bad things can get. As the IT proverb says, to err is human, but to completely foul up things requires a computer. End users may screw up the system so completely that even a competent IT department (a rare commodity) may find it impossible to restore normalcy. 但, in order to fight this self-destructive (though well-intentioned) tendency, IT departments have gone to the other extreme of making it so bureaucratic and practically impossible to get their help in anything at all!

Another group that gets a bad rap in a highly regulated organization is the auditors. Their thankless job is to look over everybody’s shoulder and make sure that they are following the rules of the game (或者更确切地说,, 遵守政策和法规,,en,审计,,en,崇高的意图因一个致命的缺陷而变得黯然失色,,en,他们似乎通过他们可以找到多少违规来衡量他们的成功,,en,而不是与被审计的人携手合作,,en,审计人员看起来好像在与其他人密切合作,,en,模糊组织中刚性筒仓的边缘可以提高生产力,,en,当孤岛互相交谈时,,en,团队合作发生了,孤岛中的人们意识到他们都朝着共同的目标努力,,en). Auditors’ noble intentions get eclipsed by one fatal flaw: they seem to measure their success by how many violations they can find. Instead of working hand in hand with those being audited, the auditors come across as though they are conspiring against the rest.

There is productivity to be gained by blurring the edges of rigid silos in organizations. When silos talk to each other, teamwork happens and those in the silos realize that they all work toward a common goal.

Internet Reading

Major changes are afoot. They have been afoot for the last twenty years. I’m talking about how we learn things, how we read, how we do basic arithmetic and so on.

In high school, I used logarithm tables to work out results in physics and chemistry experiments. Calculators were not allowed. Though inconvenient, this practice honed my arithmetic skillsskills that calculators and spreadsheets have eroded by now.

Similar erosion is taking place in our reading skills as well. We don’t read to retain information or knowledge any more. We search, scan, locate keywords, browse and bookmark. The Internet is doing to our reading habits what the calculator did to our arithmetic abilities.

Easy access to information is transforming our notion of (dare I say, respect for?) knowledge in a fundamental way. In a knowledge economy, knowledge is fast becoming a cheap commodity. We don’t need to know stuff any more; we just need to know how to find it.

I was talking to a lecturer the other day. According to him, a good lecturer is not the one who knows most and has a deep understanding of the subject, but the one that can locate the answer the fastest.

The power of instant information came with the Internet, which made experts of all of us. We can now make intelligent comments and informed decisions on anything.

Suppose, 例如, your child’s doctor recommends the proceduremyringotomy,” quite possibly something you have never heard of before. But you can Google it, read (遗憾, browse) the first couple of search results, and you will know the rationale behind the doctor’s advice, the exact procedure, its risk factors and benefits, 等等. In ten minutes, you will know what took the doctor years of hard work to learn.

This easy access to knowledge may, quite mistakenly, diminish your respect for the medical degree. This diminished reverence for knowledge is unwise; a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. A doctor’s expertise is not so much in memorizing a webpage worth of information, but also in knowing all the special circumstances where that information doesn’t apply. 除了, the webpage you happened to read may be just plain wrong. We should be careful not to mistake easy information for deep knowledge. Let’s guard our respect for true knowledge and wisdom despite our access to ready information.

Such misguided lack of respect is evident in the workplace as well, where managers think they can always hire specialized knowledge at will. I had a friend who was planning to roll out a product using Bluetooth, back when it was an emerging technology. I pointed out the obvious flaw in his proposalhe didn’t know much about Bluetooth. His reply was, “No big deal! I’ll just hire somebody who does!”

My worry is, when everybody wants to hire a Bluetooth expert and nobody wants to know how it works, there won’t be an expert any longer.

Knowledge is not cheap, although our easy access to it through the Internet may indicate otherwise. When we all become users of information, our knowledge will stop at its current level, because nobody will be creating it any more.

We are not there yet, but I worry that we are heading that way. I worry about the support structure of our knowledge base. How will our knowledge empire stand when all its foundations are gone?

Married to the Job — Till Death Do Us Part?

Stress is as much a part of our corporate careers as death is a fact of life. 还, it is best to keep the two (career and death) separate. This is the message that was lost on some hardworking young souls here who literally worked themselves to death. So do a lot of Japanese, if we are to believe the media.

The reason for death in sedentary jobs is the insidious condition called deep vein thrombosis. This condition develops because of extended hours spent sitting, when a blood clot forms in the lower limbs. 血凝块然后传播到重要器官上身,,en,在那里肆虐,包括死亡,,en,避免这样的不合时宜的困境特技,,en,没有坐长,,en,但是,这是谈何容易,,en,当工作压力太大,,en,和最后期限迫在眉睫,,en,在这里你必须让你的优先级直,,en,那你更看重,,en,生活或企业成功的质量,,en,在这个选择的含义是,你不能兼得,,en,如图所示,在投资银行认为是这样的笑话,,en,如果你不能来上周六,,en,不要打扰星期天来参加,,en,作出妥协,,en,它可以放手职业理想的一点点,极大提高生活质量,,en,这种平衡不是那么简单,虽然,,en,没有什么是生活,,en, where it wreaks havoc including death.

The trick in avoiding such an untimely demise, 当然, is not to sit for long. But that is easier said than done, when job pressure mounts, and deadlines loom.

Here is where you have to get your priorities straight. What do you value more? Quality of life or corporate success? The implication in this choice is that you can’t have both, as illustrated in the joke in investment banking that goes like: “If you can’t come in on Saturday, don’t bother coming in on Sunday!”

您可以, 然而,, make a compromise. It is possible to let go a little bit of career aspirations and improve the quality of life tremendously. This balancing act is not so simple though; nothing in life is.

破坏了工作与生活的平衡是几个因素,,en,一个是我们生活在物欲横流的文化,,en,这是很难打的是趋势,,en,二是被误导的概念,你可以,,en,做了,,en,然后坐下来享受生活,,en,在那个时间点,当你摆脱世俗的烦恼很少物化,,en,你可能有一个职业化的合作伙伴,,en,甚至当你准备采取平衡的方法,,en,你的伴侣可能不,,en,从而减少把它在实践中的价值,,en,这些都是你的因素不断的争斗反对,,en,你可以赢得战斗,,en,与逻辑,,en,纪律和决心,,en,还有第四,,en,更为险恶,,en,因子,,en,这是一个成功的职业生涯是一个全有或全无的命题神话,,en,作为暗示在前面的投资银行笑话,,en,这是一个神话,,en,也许,故意老板传播,,en. One is the materialistic culture we live in. It is hard to fight that trend. Second is a misguided notion that you can “make it” 第一, then sit back and enjoy life. That point in time when you are free from worldly worries rarely materializes. 第三, you may have a career-oriented partner. Even when you are ready to take a balanced approach, your partner may not be, thereby diminishing the value of putting it in practice.

These are factors you have to constantly battle against. And you can win the battle, with logic, discipline and determination. 然而, there is a fourth, much more sinister, factor, which is the myth that a successful career is an all-or-nothing proposition, as implied in the preceding investment banking joke. It is a myth (perhaps knowingly propagated by the bosses) 那笼罩着我们的企业当头达摩克利斯之剑,,en,因为这个神话,,en,人们最终会工作到很晚,,en,试图使一个印象,,en,但一个印象是由,,en,没有工作的数量,,en,但其质量,,en,打开质量,,en,有影响力的工作,,en,你会得到回报,,en,不管需要多长时间来完成它,,en,使质量工作远程的可能性,,en,这种忧郁的时间长最好留给工作狂,,en,他们继续工作,因为他们不能帮助它,,en,这与其说是一个职业理想,,en,但习惯的力量加上恐惧社会生活,,en,罢工在今天的狗工作与生活的平衡吃狗的世界,,en,你可能要牺牲众所周知的企业阶梯的少数上层梯级,,en.

Because of this myth, people end up working late, trying to make an impression. But an impression is made, not by the quantity of work, but by its quality. Turn in quality, impactful work, and you will be rewarded, regardless of how long it takes to accomplish it. Long hours, 在我看来, make the possibility of quality work remote.

Such melancholy long hours are best left to workaholics; they keep working because they cannot help it. It is not so much a career aspiration, but a force of habit coupled with a fear of social life.

To strike a work-life balance in today’s dog eat dog world, you may have to sacrifice a few upper rungs of the proverbial corporate ladder. 愤怒的对公司机器完全不考虑后果,最终归结为一个简单的实现,,en,即谋生相当于什么,如果你的生活在这个过程中失去了,,en,配偶冷漠,,en,我们给一个该死,,en,在工作一整天后,,en,你想休息你用尽心思,,en,可能是你想幸灾乐祸一下自己的小胜利,,en,或者抱怨一下自己一天的小挫折,,en,对于这种心理宣泄理想的受害者是你的配偶,,en,但配偶,,en,在今天的双收入家庭,,en,也从一个疲惫的心灵在这一天结束痛苦,,en,2个疲惫心灵之间的对话通常缺少的重要组成,,en,听者,,en,而如果没有一个听众的对话是没有太大的谈话都,,en — that making a living amounts to nothing if your life is lost in the process.

Spousal Indifference — Do We Give a Damn?

After a long day at work, you want to rest your exhausted mind; may be you want to gloat a bit about your little victories, or whine a bit about your little setbacks of the day. The ideal victim for this mental catharsis is your spouse. But the spouse, in today’s double income families, is also suffering from a tired mind at the end of the day.

The conversation between two tired minds usually lacks an essential ingredient — the listener. And a conversation without a listener is not much of a conversation at all. 这是仅将2个独白,将最终产生一个更加挫折抱怨,,en,配偶的冷漠,,en,冷漠是不是在嘲笑小事,,en,这是爱的对立面,,en,如果我们相信埃利·韦泽尔,,en,所以我们必须要警惕的冷漠,如果我们想拥有幸福在一杆,,en,一个没有爱的生活很少是幸福的,,en,哪里有时间,,en,Â问我们新加坡人,,en,太忙了,形成一个完整的句子,,en,在我们所有的世俗烦恼的心脏,,en,我们只有,,en,在一天的时间就明天之前自带的充电,,en,抹杀了一天的我们所有的高贵内涵,,en,而另一个周期开始,,en,大轮的另一个必然革命,,en,和老鼠赛跑的推移,,en,与老鼠赛跑麻烦的是,,,en,即使你赢了,,en,你依然是一只老鼠,,en,我们如何打破这种恶性循环,,en — spousal indifference.

Indifference is no small matter to scoff at. It is the opposite of love, if we are to believe Elie Weisel. So we do have to guard against indifference if we want to have a shot at happiness, for a loveless life is seldom a happy one.

“Where got time?” ask we Singaporeans, too busy to form a complete sentence. Ah… 时间! At the heart of all our worldly worries. We only have 24 hours of it in a day before tomorrow comes charging in, obliterating all our noble intentions of the day. And another cycle begins, another inexorable revolution of the big wheel, and the rat race goes on.

The trouble with the rat race is that, 在它的结束, even if you win, you are still a rat!

How do we break this vicious cycle? 我们可以通过倾听而不是谈论启动,,en,倾听并不容易,因为它听起来,,en,我们平时听心理过滤器的一大堆开启,,en,不断地判断并处理我们听到的一切,,en,我们的标签进入报表一样重要,,en,不重要的,,en,可怜,,en,我们还会存储他们离开,在我们疲倦的大脑适当的权重,,en,忽略了一个重要的事实,,en,扬声器的标签可能是,,en,而且往往是,,en,完全不同,,en,由于这种潜在的贴错标签,,en,可能是什么日子为你的配偶或伴侣的最重要的胜利还是心痛可能会意外地得到拖放到你的心灵的回收站,,en,避免这种无意的残酷,,en,关掉你的过滤器,并与你的心脏听,,en,至于韦斯利·斯奈普斯建议伍迪·赫雷尔森在白人不能跳,,en,听她的,,en,或者他,,en. Listening is not as easy as it sounds. We usually listen with a whole bunch of mental filters turned on, constantly judging and processing everything we hear. We label the incoming statements as important, 有用, trivial, pathetic, 等. And we store them away with appropriate weights in our tired brain, ignoring one crucial fact — that the speaker’s labels may be, and often are, completely different.

Due to this potential mislabeling, what may be the most important victory or heartache of the day for your spouse or partner may accidentally get dragged and dropped into your mind’s recycle bin. Avoid this unintentional cruelty; turn off your filters and listen with your heart. As Wesley Snipes advises Woody Herrelson in White Men Can’t Jump, listen to her (or him, 视情况可以是。,,en,它支付练习这样一个不带偏见的和无条件的听音风格,,en,它协调了与你的配偶的优先级,拉你远离配偶冷漠的深渊,,en,但是这需要多年的实践,制定适当的听力技巧,,en,并继续耐心和刻意将其应用,,en,答:我们可能会问,,en,莱塔€™的化妆时间,,en,或做最好的那一点点时间,我们得到,,en,当日子加起来几个月甚至几年,,en,我们可以回顾历史,责问,,en,哪里是我们在生活失去了生命,,en,几乎是不可思议的小,,en,如果八秒,我们是非常幸运的,,en,如果定价模式再次推迟您的交易员可能会咬你的头,,en,唐娜€™吨你得到它,,en,压力和形而上学,,en,意识到我们的存在是一个眼睛的时间仅仅是眨眼,,en)

It pays to practice such an unbiased and unconditional listening style. It harmonizes your priorities with those your spouse and pulls you away from the abyss of spousal apathy. But there is no such thing as a free lunch. It takes years of practice to develop the proper listening technique, and continued patience and deliberate effort to apply it.

“Where got time?” we may ask. 好, let’s make time, or make the best of what little time we got. 否则, when days add up to months and years, we may look back and wonder, where is the life that we lost in living?

How Much is Talent Worth?

Singapore needs foreign talent. This need is nothing to feel bad about. It is a statistical fact of life. For every top Singaporean in any fieldbe it science, medicine, 财经, sports or whateverwe will find about 500 professionals of equal caliber in China and India. Not because we are 500 times less talented, just that they have 500 times more people.

Coupled with overwhelming statistical supremacy, certain countries have special superiority in their chosen or accidental specializations. We expect to find more hardware experts in China, more software gurus in India, more badminton players in Indonesia, more entrepreneurial spirit and managerial expertise in the west.

We need such experts, so we hire them. But how much should we pay them? That’s where economics comes in — demand and supply. We offer the lowest possible package that the talent would bite.

I was on an expatriate package when I came to Singapore as a foreign talent. It was a fairly generous package, but cleverly worded so that if I became alocal” 天赋, I would lose out quite a bit. I did become local a few years later, and my compensation diminished as a consequence. My talent did not change, just the label fromforeign” 至 “local.

This experience made me think a bit about the value of talent and the value of labels. These values translate to compensation packages that can be ordered, from high to low, 如: Western (Caucasians), Western (of Asian origin), 新加坡, Asian (Chinese, Indian, 等等。).

I’m not saying that all Caucasians in Singapore do better than all Indians and Chinese in terms of income; but the trend is that for the same talent, Caucasians tend to be better compensated that their Asian counterparts. Nothing wrong with thatit’s all about demand and supply, and the perception of value and such economic fundamentals. 除了, this compensation scheme has worked well for us so far.

然而, the locals are beginning to take note of this asymmetric compensation structure. When I was considering hiring a Caucasian, my ex-boss commented, “These Ang-Mos, they talk big in meetings and stuff, but don’t do any work!” He may have oversimplified; I know manyAng-Moswho are extremely talented and fully deserve the higher-than-local compensation they enjoy. But this perceived disparity between what the talent is worth and how much it costs (as depicted in the movie I Not Stupid) is beginning to hurt employee loyalty to such an extent that firms are experiencing staff retention issues when it comes to local talents.

The solution to this problem is not a stricter enforcement of the confidentiality of salaries, but a more transparent compensation scheme free of anomalies that can be misconstrued as unfair practices. 否则, we may see an increasing number of Asian nationals using Singapore as a stepping stone to greener pastures. 更糟糕, we may see locals seeking level playing fields elsewhere.

Let’s hire the much needed talent whatever it costs; but let’s not mistake labels for talent.

Performance Appraisal — Who Needs It?

We go through this ordeal every year when our bosses appraise our performance. Our career progression, bonus and salary depend on it. So we spend sleepless nights agonizing over it.

In addition to the appraisal, we also get our “key performance indicators” or KPIs for next year. These are the commandments we have to live by for the rest of the year. The whole experience of it is so unpleasant that we say to ourselves that life as an employee sucks.

The bosses fare hardly better though. They have to worry about their own appraisals by bigger bosses. On top of that, they have to craft the KPI commandments for us as well — a job pretty darned difficult to delegate. 在所有的可能性, they say to themselves that their life as a boss sucks!

Given that nobody is thrilled about the performance appraisal exercise, why do we do it? Who needs it?

The objective behind performance appraisal is noble. It strives to reward good performance and punish poor shows — the old carrot and stick management paradigm. This objective is easily met in a small organization without the need for a formal appraisal process. Small business owners know who to keep and who to sack. But in a big corporate body with thousands of employees, how do you design a fair and consistent compensation scheme?

The solution, 当然, is to pay a tidy sum to consultants who design appraisal forms and define a uniform process — too uniform, 也许. Such verbose forms and inflexible processes come with inherent problems. One problem is that the focus shifts from the original objective (carrot and stick) to fairness and consistency (one-size-fits-all). 你要知道, most bosses know who to reward and who to admonish. But the HR department wants the bosses to follow a uniform process, thereby increasing everybody’s workload.

Another, more insidious problem with this consultancy driven approach is that it is necessarily geared towards mediocrity. When you design an appraisal process to cater to everybody, the best you can hope to achieve is to improve the average performance level by a bit. Following such a process, the CERN scientist who invented the World Wide Web would have fared badly, for he did not concentrate on his KPIs and wasted all his time thinking about file transfers!

CERN is a place that consistently produces Nobel laureates. (I once found myself with two Nobel laureates in a CERN elevator!) How does it do it? Certainly not by following processes that are designed to make incremental improvements at the average level. The trick is to be a center for excellence which attracts geniuses.

当然, it is not fair to compare an average organization with CERN. But we have to realize that the verbose forms, which focus on averages and promote mediocrity, are a poor tool for innovation management.

A viable alternative to standardized and regimented appraisal processes is to align employee objectives with those of the organization and leave performance and reward management to bosses. With some luck, this approach may retain fringe geniuses and promote innovation. 最起码, it will alleviate some employee anxiety and sleepless nights.

Handling Goodbyes

Hold on to your pants, your key staff has just tendered his resignationyour worst nightmare as a manager! Once the dust settles and the panic subsides, you begin to ask yourself, what next?

Staff retention is a major problem in the current job market in Singapore. Our economy is doing well; our job market is red hot. 其结果, new job offers are becoming increasingly more irresistible. At some stage, someone you work closely withbe it your staff, your boss or a fellow team memberis going to hand in that dreaded letter to HR. Handling resignations with tact and grace is no longer merely a desirable quality, but an essential corporate skill today.

We do have some general strategies to deal with resignations. The first step is to assess the motivation behind the career choice. Is it money? 如果是这样的, a counter offer is usually successful. Counter offers (both making them and taking them) are considered ineffective and in poor taste. 至少, executive search firms insist that they are. 但随后, they would say that, wouldn’t they?

If the motivation behind the resignation is the nature of the current or future job and its challenges, a lateral movement or reassignment (possibly combined with a counter offer) can be effective. If everything fails, then it is time to say goodbyeamicably.

It is vitally important to maintain this amicabilitya fact often lost on bosses and HR departments. Understandably so because, by the time the counter offer negotiations fail, there is enough rancor on both sides to sour the relationship. Brush those wounded feelings aside and smile through your pain, for your paths may cross again. You may rehire the same person. 或, you may end up working with him/her on the other side. Salvage whatever little you can for the sake of positive networking.

The level of amicability depends on corporate culture. Some organizations are so cordial with deserting employees that they almost encourage desertion. Others treat the traitors as the army used towith the help of a firing squad.

Both these extremes come with their associated perils. If you are too cordial, your employees may treat your organization as a stepping stone, concentrating on acquiring only transferable skills. On the other extreme, if you develop a reputation for severe exit barriers in an attempt to discourage potential traitors, you may also find it hard to recruit top talent.

The right approach lies somewhere in between, like most good things in life. It is a cultural choice that an organization has to make. But regardless of where the balance is found, resignation is here to stay, and people will change jobs. 更改, as the much overused cliche puts it, is the only constant.