Jim Collins: Right. But, it's sort of starts there. And I think this is the real critical thing is key seats, what do you see as your most important seats?
I don't think you can compromise and have people who aren't passionate about what you folks are trying to do. Because then, first of all, they're not going, they can't do anything great if they're not particularly passionate about it. Now, where does it come from? I think you find people that are passionate; I don't think you can necessarily make people passionate.
We learned a very interesting thing about motivation. And in the "Good to Great" study, we're wrestling with the question of, how did these executives, particularly since they were not charismatic, in many cases, get people motivated and excited for the changes they needed to undergo?
And we kept asking them this question and we kept getting a blank response. They didn't understand the question.
Ok, you had these things you were tying to do, you had these people, and nobody's really excited and you went and did them. How did you do that? What do you mean, how did we do that? And we realized they didn't spend time motivating people. They thought the idea of motivating people was a waste of time.
What they spent time on was finding self motivated people. And then putting the things in place, and managing in such a way that you don't demotivate people who are already motivated.
I've done this thing a number of times, where I've been in a large room and I'll just simply ask, how many people in here today woke up this morning and said to yourself, I'd go do something interesting today only if somebody would come in and motivate me? No hands go up. If you really think about it, it kind of an insulting idea. The idea that somehow I am the motivator and you are this lump of flesh. And I as the motivator, I'm going to come in and infuse you with motivation. Well, if I'm the lump of flesh I don't feel very good about that, right?
So, what they really did is they said, we find people who have that kind of motivation when they come in the door and what we try to do is not destroy it. And that is a very different way of thinking about it.
Now, that said. I think that there are a lot of things companies can do about right seats that companies can teach.
One of the real critical dimensions of right people, may be we should just mention on some of those.
Uh-huh So, we stood back and said, ok, if we look across our researches, are there any kind of generic attributes of right people for key seats?
And we found a number, obviously there is always going to be specific things to that seat, or specific things to that company. If you're in bioengineering, if you are a biotechnology company and you're in the science area, you better know something about biochemistry or how to sequence DNA. Obviously that's important for the seat, but, in terms of generically...
And one, the right people in the key seat really don't think of it that they have a job. They have responsibilities and that's a huge distinction the idea that, no I'm responsible for bringing airplanes down safe, or I am responsible for the safety of the patient, or I am responsible for quality here, or I'm responsible, it's a set, I'm responsible for how the customer feels.
I'm responsible, I don't have a job, I don't have a list, I have a responsibility.
The second is that the right people in the key seats do what they say they're going to do, period.
Accountability.
Yeah, self-accountability. And so which means, they're very careful what they say they will do.
Number three. The right people have this very interesting, we call it, the 'window and mirror maturity'. What this means is, when some thing goes badly, they don't blame others. Even if it wasn't their fault, but if it's their responsibility, they'll stand in front of a mirror and say, I'm responsible. Here's what I learned, here's what I'll put in place for the future. Tremendous sense of learning.
And the flipside is, when things go really well, they don't take a lot of the credit. They readily point to the other people or the forces and factors that may have helped them be successful.
That's a very healthy response and you'll find that some people are always, if something goes wrong, they're blaming someone or something else rather than saying: I'm ultimately responsible and here's what I learned from it, here's how I grow.
Then we talked about that they have a passion for the company and they fit with the company's core values. Kind of walking in the door. So, these are really critical aspects of right people in key seats.
Now, you'll notice on there, that these are more character traits. Then there are skills and what we've learned about those that built a great company with a great culture is they focused on character, not on skills. What they would do is hire people who didn't necessarily know the business. So, we can teach them the business, we can't teach the work ethic. We can't teach them a sense of responsibility, we can't teach them a set of values. Because they bring those things with them, we can teach skills.
And so, we'll probably come back a little bit later when we talk about reduction into values. But, it's very interesting in Nucor's case how they opened up their steel mills in farming towns. And they opened their steel mills in farming towns because they said that farmers, there's a certain work ethic, rural, agrarian work ethic that will be very helpful in making steel. We can't teach that work ethic, but we can find it in these towns. And we can teach them how to make steel. So, instead of hiring folks who don't have a work ethic and try to give it to them. They said, we'll hire farmers that have a work ethic and we'll teach them how to make steel.
And you were mentioning a little while ago about the number of people coming out of universities is tripling in China. And you were talking about how companies have a great need for people; but young people don't yet have the skills that are needed.
What that means is, kind of a feeder program, you're trying to get those people who have the character you're looking for, they may be young, they may be untested and you bring them in and you train them in your business and you hire them based on the kinds of character you see in them and then you teach them the skills of the business, and that opens your playing field, much wider than saying we have to have someone coming out at age 22 that already knows our business. It's going to be a much smaller set of people to search through. |
|
吉姆·柯林斯：是的。但是，这基本上只是个起点。我认为最重要的是关键性的岗位。你眼中的关键岗位有哪些？
我认为对于公司业务没有热情的人，你不能接收他们，绝不能妥协。因为，首先，如果他们没有热情，就做不出好的业绩。我认为应该寻找本身就富有热情的员工；我认为你未必可以让人们变得充满热情。
关于激励，我们发现了一些有趣的现象。《从优秀到卓越》（Good to Great）一书中，我们在思辨一个问题，这些高管们，尤其是那些不具备个人魅力的高管们，是怎样激励员工的，是如何使他们对即将经历的变革感到兴奋的？
我们一直在问受访对象这个问题，却总是得不到答案。他们无法理解这个问题。
我们会问，假设你打算做一些事情，手下有一些员工，他们都不对此感到兴奋，而你一往直前完成了工作。你是如何做到的？他们会反问，你们是什么意思，是要了解我们的做法吗？最后我们意识到，他们并没有花时间去激励员工。他们认为那是浪费时间。
他们真正费力去做的是寻找具有主动性的员工。这样一来，你只需做好部署，同时在管理中确保不让员工丧失斗志就可以了。
有几次，我在一个大屋子里，直接问在场的人，有多少人早上醒来对自己说，我今天只有在他人的激励之下才会去做些有意思的事？没有人举手。认真想想，你会发现这个想法有点侮辱人。也就是说，我是激励者，而你们只是行尸走肉。作为激励者，我走进房间，将激情注入你们的体内。如果我是那具行尸走肉的话，我也不会高兴的，对吗？
所以，他们的做法是，寻找具有主动性的员工，而且当他们入职之后，我们要做的就是不要去打击他们、破坏他们的主动性。这就是一种非常特别的思考角度。
说过这个问题之后，关于合适岗位的问题，公司有很多可以做的事。关于合适员工的关键素质，我们也许应该略提一二。
回顾过去的研究，我们是否发现了关键岗位上合适人选的一些共同的素质呢？的确有一些。当然，不同的岗位或者公司会有不同的情况。比如你在生物工程或者生物技术公司，你是科研领域的员工，那么你应该懂得生化或者DNA排序。很显然对于特定岗位，这是很关键的。
但是通常说来，合适人选不会把自己的职责仅仅看成是一份工作，而是看成一种责任。这之间有非常巨大的区别。他们会说，我负责让飞机安全降落，我负责让患者安康，我有责任保证产品质量合格，或者我要保证客户满意。我不是仅仅有一份工作、一份任务清单，而是有一份责任。
第二点是，关键岗位的合适人选会落实他们说过要做的事情。
责任感。
是的，自我问责。他们在表示将要做什么事情时，是很谨慎的。
第三点，合适人选有着“窗户和镜子的成熟心态”，这非常有意思。就是说，失败时他们不会推卸给他人，即使并非他们自己的错。但是如果是他们的责任的话，他们就会站在镜子前面说，我有责任，我学到了这些，我今后会改正这些。很有学习意识。
而且，当事情很成功时，他们不会邀功，而是指出有其他人或者其他因素帮助了他们获得成功。
这是非常健康的反应。你会发现有些人在失败时总是怨天尤人，而不是说：失败最终应由我负责，通过失败我成长了。
合适员工对公司还怀有深厚感情，融合了公司核心价值观，有如一家人。这些就是关键岗位合适员工的几个很关键的素质。
你会注意到，这里更多的是性格特点。至于技能问题，我们了解到，建立起一家卓越公司以及良好文化的人更多注重性格而不是技能。他们所雇用的人不一定是很懂行的。我们可以向他们教授行业知识，但是我们无法教授职业道德。我们无法教授责任感以及一系列价值观。当他们自身具备这些素质时，我们则可以教授给他们技能。
我们之后谈到价值观削弱的问题时，可能会回顾这个话题。纽克公司（Nucor）的案例就很有意思。他们在农业城镇开办炼钢厂，因为他们认为农民具备一定的职业道德，而这种源于农业的职业道德对于炼钢会很有帮助。我们不能教授这种职业道德，但是我们可以在这些城镇找到具备此类道德的人，然后教他们炼钢。因此，该公司并没有去雇佣无职业道德的人然后试图向他们传授职业道德。他们说，我们要雇佣具备职业道德的农民，然后教他们怎么炼钢。
你刚才提到中国大学毕业生的人数增加了两倍。你刚才也提到很多公司目前很需要人手，但是年轻人还不具备他们要求的技能。
这就意味着一个培养计划。你试图招募这些具备了你所要求品质的人，他们可能很年轻，尚未经历考验，你可能会将他们招进来并加以行业训练。因此你雇佣他们是基于你在他们身上发掘的品质，之后才教授行业技能。这就很大地拓宽了你的选择空间，这比你去寻找一群22岁的行家里手更有可能获得成功。那就只会是很小的一群人供你选择。 |
