What to do when your subordinates become window breakers?

First, instead of intensifying the contradiction, it is better to resolve the embarrassment, for such subordinates, in fact, he has no malice, but he can't hide secrets in his heart, that is to say, he can't control his mouth, so he always pierces the window paper for the first time, and works hard to communicate, it is his subordinates who are not fake, you can also force it, but don't do it, be careful of the fish and the net is broken, and communicate with him appropriately, so that he can remember it in the future.

Second, since you can't contain the fire in the paper, it's good to make it public, you have already suffered a loss, remember to avoid this subordinate in the future, maybe he is also unintentional, but the listener has a heart, so whether it is a subordinate or a superior, you must remember to guard against others.

Third, in fact, in the final analysis, it is your own fault, if you can keep secrets, you will not let your subordinates become window breakers, eat a trench and grow wise, don't think about sanctioning subordinates and expelling subordinates, the main reason is still yourself. Thank you.

When this is wrong, let's deal with these abilities like this.

Personally, I think that if a subordinate has played a bad role and caused a bad influence and exemplary role among the employees, then I will:

1. Within the scope of the company's system, give the most severe punishment, and if the strength is not enough, then issue a notice of criticism. to deter the rise of unhealthy tendencies.

2. I am talking to this subordinate in private, pointing out his mistakes, telling him what I expect from him, hoping that he will not be discouraged and will cheer up to avoid making mistakes again in the future.

In this way, the combination of rigidity and softness can not only deal with the window breaker, but also not let the window breaker lose his fighting spirit!

Achievements belong to achievements, mistakes must be investigated, treated equally, dealt with seriously, and more strict requirements for themselves.

I think this should be dealt with according to the company's rules and regulations, because his behavior is one. Indescribable, no. Acts of accusation.

What should you do if the water is wrongly diagnosed? It should be possible.

If my subordinate is very good, then he will definitely be able to reach the height that he can rise to, and in this case, I will definitely support it.

My excellent subordinates became window breakers.

I should properly educate and encourage the good in a proper way.

Because he violated the relevant discipline or law, he should be punished severely, and should not be appeased.

Deal with things and not people, let them take warning, and never make mistakes in the future.

Your excellent subordinates become window breakers, how do you deal with them? Encourage him, let him continue to break the window, he will wake up himself.

Listen to opinions, carefully divide the reasons for his opposition, consider the distribution plan from different angles, try to be fair, and use the strengths of the people to distribute the work.

I'll be in the assessment.

Communicate well with your subordinates before, explain the reasons for such an evaluation conclusion, and let him be convinced and accept it calmly.

Now that it's an afterthought, let's find an opportunity to talk to my subordinates, and don't have to back down to please him, but if you let him understand the reasons for such an evaluation, the point is to make him feel that receiving such an evaluation is not for him personally, it is the result of a fair evaluation, which may alleviate his dissatisfaction, and if handled well, it can also promote him to make up for his weaknesses, be motivated, and do his job better.

"Employing people without suspicion, suspecting people without suspicion" is an important principle in management. When a manager delegates authority to others, he must delegate sufficient authority to others, otherwise he will get twice the result with half the effort and waste his efforts. Corresponding to this principle, the American management scientist Ed Bliss also proposed that "when you delegate, you should entrust the whole thing to the other party, and at the same time give him enough authority to make the necessary decisions."

This is the "Bliss Principle".

The corresponding counter-words: "Use people as suspicious, suspicious people as they use, use them while doubting, and use them while doubting." ”

In fact, it's all the same, it's just a matter of understanding the angle, employing people without doubt, why there are so many rules and regulations in enterprises; Suspects don't need it, why do they need to inspect and supervise?

Power and responsibility are equal, the greater the power, the heavier the responsibility, and the greater the impact on the enterprise. Therefore, there are many prerequisites for authorization, and if the prerequisites are satisfied, it can be fully authorized, otherwise it is still appropriate to authorize, otherwise there will be a phenomenon of "death if you catch it, and chaos when you loosen it".

The cause of the matter leads to the result (and this process needs to be figured out) who is right and who is wrong! Then coordinate the participants, and now is the time to test your abilities.

Separate and persuade and say something to make concessions.

It should be considered in many aspects depending on the situation of the contradiction, and whether the contradiction intensifies and affects normal work. If there is only a conflict between the two parties, but it does not intensify, affecting the normal work, the mediation work can be done privately. If the conflict between the two parties affects the normal operation of the organization, it is generally necessary to solve two problems first:

One is to calm down what is already in place; The second is to warn others, and then conduct effective mediation according to the actual situation. Conflicts between employees, both sides think they are reasonable, in fact, both sides are wrong, there are many ways to solve problems, positive contradictions are the most ineffective ways and methods, after the contradictions, in fact, the problem still exists, and affects the normal communication and collaboration of two people, can not solve the problem at all, and violates the rules and regulations of the enterprise, affects the normal order of the enterprise, in this case, you can first play fifty boards. The purpose of each of the 50 boards is not to deal with the reasons for the contradictions between the two sides, but to calm the conflicts, restore normal order, and warn others.

After each of them played 50 boards, they mediated the contradictions between the two sides. When there is a conflict between subordinates and direct leaders, higher-level managers should focus on maintaining the overall situation, comprehensively consider, and "favor" the leader, because any enterprise needs to be orderly, when the authority of the leader is challenged, it will cause greater confusion and make it more difficult to carry out future work, so the higher-level managers rarely criticize their direct leaders in front of their subordinates. In the event of a conflict between an employee and a team leader, it is best to mediate individually and face-to-face, so that both parties can recognize their mistakes and reach a settlement.

It is normal for some conflicts to occur at work, and if they do not exceed a certain range, they are not a big deal.

The only thing to note here is that if it is because of the analysis generated by the work, then it proves that the employee's commitment to the work is more serious and persistent, and it needs to be correctly guided and channeled.

If it is because of a personal problem, then it needs to be punished.

Then you are a domestic and your two subordinates have a car accident, you let me say it, you will try, if you are a manager, you don't send this picture, your shareholder status has seen men and women come over, and after a while, you can't go to Germany if both happen. Ask my husband to take it for you, and I'll be in the building area for a while, and I must not transition this thing from time to time.

First of all, to prevent the conflict from continuing to develop, so that the two sides can calm down, and secondly, to understand the reasons for the conflict on both sides, so as to give medicine to the evidence, and coordinate and resolve it according to the understanding of the situation, so as to achieve fairness, justice and impartiality, so that the two sides can shake hands and make peace.

First come soft, it's okay to communicate more, maybe you don't communicate enough;If it doesn't work, report it directly to the superior leader.

First of all, you have to be self-critical about what you are doing wrong.

Employees have an opinion 1 is the treatment. 2 is the workload. 3 is personal respect.

If there is a problem with the first two, then think about how to solve it yourself.

The third word, hehe, character problems, no way.

Go deep among the masses, think about what the masses think, and earnestly solve problems.

Find out the cause and make a judgment based on the actual situation.

Do it to convince people with reason and morality!

Understand the reason why he does not obey, if it is his own problem, correct it himself, and if it is a subordinate's problem, use the system to restrain him.

First understand why you don't do that job, if it's a problem with the arrangement, then you have to correct it, if not, it must be implemented, and if there is a problem, you can raise it to improve.

Find him personally, do that job with him, and enlighten him properly!

First consider whether there is a contradiction between the manager himself and the subordinate, the subordinate does not cooperate with the work, many reasons are all kinds of contradictions with the boss, the manager should first communicate with the manager about the problem, and then solve the problem, if still do not cooperate with the work, if the employee is a relative of the emperor, the boss does not fire, his performance greatly affects the team, that try to persuade the boss, if the boss does not solve, of course, it depends on what the manager himself pursues, Or ask the boss to agree to arrange him to be in charge of unimportant parts, or the showdown he does not leave, and the manager leaves. The company has also encountered a similar situation, an old employee, relatively stable, but average ability, communication skills problems, the department leader wanted to quit her, but because the boss did not agree, so give up, let her be responsible for some less important basic work, does not affect the progress of the whole team.

This is similar to making friends. Why is he unwilling to cooperate with you? Is it his problem?

Or is it your problem? Again, you have opposing ideas on small things. If it is someone else's problem, communicate well, and hope that he can also say his thoughts and opinions to the subordinates, and try to reach a consensus after communicating with each other.

If it's your own problem, you have to imagine it! Maybe you didn't respect him in some things! Maybe it's your words and your actions that cause misunderstanding to others, and they think that you are very fake and insidious and cunning.

A long-term conflict can lead to a series of problems.