Thinking about whether member disengagement is a bad thing
Feb 21, 2022
Purpose of this article
Unless you manage your organization with a proper awareness of culture fit, it will eventually fall apart and disperse.
If you force people who do not fit into your culture to stay with you, execution may be disrupted and you may not be able to hope for profits. In such cases, it is simpler to consider whether the departure of a member is a bad thing or not. The following is a brief description.
Eliminate the bad image of employee departures
In many cases, dismissal and encouragement of resignation are talked about with a bad impression. Resignation is also perceived as a bad image. In the past, when food was scarce, it would have been necessary to impose various regulations to protect employees because they would not be able to eat and would not have jobs.
Now, with the job market in place, it is more desirable for members to change, and there are many cases where the organization can be revitalized. Retaining the right members and encouraging the mobility of those who do not fit in is necessary to protect those who do not fit in and for the sake of the members who are there.
The word “harassment” is used, and while sexual harassment is out of the question, power harassment becomes unintelligible when extended. If it is banned, the organization becomes unviable.
If psychological safety is misunderstood, the organization will become a mere loose circle, a loss-making organization with no profit, and as a result, the organization will be in danger of dissolution. Likewise, if too much care is taken against harassment, the organization will not be able to run as an entity, and as a loose organization, it will not be able to produce anything. The culture will become stagnant, and the best people will be lost.
Psychological safety is simply a matter of creating a situation that does not become a panic zone, not of eliminating competition. It does not exclude competition, nor does it exclude command and supervision. In layman’s terms, it means creating a situation where members can thrive in a zone of high productivity (stretch zone) beyond their comfort zone.
Members who cannot grow and do not fit into the culture are unhappy just being there. This is because the market does not value people who do not grow. The market doesn’t appreciate people who don’t grow, because the market doesn’t appreciate people who don’t grow. The market doesn’t value people who don’t fit in because they are not given a chance.
As an employer, you should hire people who are a good cultural fit, and if someone who is not a good cultural fit happens to join your team, you should let them know that they are not a good fit. If a person who does not fit the culture stays, it will not be a positive thing. You should let them know that it will not make them happy.
Total optimization? Individual optimization?
Many trials are held at listed companies, so the courts consider worker protection. However, even if the court’s decision is optimal for each individual, it is not optimal for the whole. If the trend is to say that labor laws should be protected and management is bad, it will only reduce the number of people who become managers and create a situation that does not create jobs.
If judges, who do not understand management, condemn managers with employment woes, managers will simply choose the least risky method possible. They will try to avoid hiring through outsourcing, dispatching, and other methods. Judges and politicians will create a vicious cycle.
To answer the question of how to eliminate black companies that degrade people’s dignity, it is better to create a situation where they go out of business by word of mouth or by increasing the number of retirees. Also, it is better to increase the mobility of employment such as changing jobs. It is not desirable to have a situation where people are protected after they become depressed or after they die. Instead, it is better to create an environment where leaving the company is acceptable.
As a manager, it is your job to take risks, but if you are unnecessarily placing too much responsibility on yourself and dragging your feet, you will not be able to take on the challenges ahead. It’s easy to criticize managers who don’t take on challenges, but it’s better to watch their step.
There are three ways for people to grow: 1) change their environment, 2) change their habits, and 3) change the people they associate with, but 1 is the most efficient. And sometimes it is about protecting the members.
You should also realize the benefit that disengagement is actually good for the person (making them aware of things they are not aware of). If a person is highly loyal, management will usually not give up on them. However, if they do not learn, repeatedly make excuses, or talk behind the back of management or their peers, it is not worth talking about. They reduce the efficiency of the work, destroy the working environment of the members, and cause dozens of times more damage to the workplace than their salary just by being there. The communication cost is also high, and the person also demotivates others. In fact, they also make themselves unhappy.
It is possible for anyone to criticize the old way of doing things or the way of doing things that do not fit. If that is the case, then you should be independent and do something to renew the old ways. That is the source of power for me to support the venture. If there is an internal struggle between the old and new ways of doing things, the efficiency of the company will become very poor and the atmosphere will become bad. Organizations should not be divided. Organizations should be consistent, and Zen is the preferred way to change organizations. Zen is easy to put in place when the organization is in chaos because the external environment has changed and the risks have become high. This is because they know that seniority is meaningless in such situations. Such aspiring people would immediately quit the company and go to another company if there is any power harassment.
If each person is aware of their own strengths and understands their market value, it is easier to avoid power harassment and other conflicts. It is clear that if the past ways of doing things are imposed, the employees will quit, so the boss just needs to change the way things are done.
In short, the overall optimization is to change the atmosphere, and even if individual optimization is carried out enthusiastically (e.g., by setting penalties), the manager will only stop taking risks, which is not the essential solution.
Encouraging employees to resign should be done only for their own sake.
To be honest, I think that people who think that they are recommending people to resign in order to protect the company are dangerous people. Of course, psychopaths who drive people to suicide are too dangerous, so no matter how hostile they are or what the conclusion of the court is, they should put their bodies on the line to protect the company and its members. There is no need to compromise when it comes to protecting human lives. We need to move quickly so that no new victims will arise.
On the other hand, those who do not fit into the culture should be told that there is a good chance that they will be able to work elsewhere. This is because they are simply not able to perform well here.
If the company does not provide any feedback to the person and keeps him/her, the market may not respond. Now, however, the doujin may be given the opportunity to be active elsewhere.
If you kick him out in a way that tramples on his pride, he may lose confidence and stumble a lot. If it is too late, he may lose more opportunities. It is better for the company to have a system in place to warmly send them off as graduates.
The most undesirable thing is to be able to offer some when the company is profitable, but only a few when the company is not profitable. If you can only offer a few tears to those who want to leave, you can only draw a bad spiral.
It would be desirable to have a process in place to bring in the right number of employees as soon as possible. It is better to have a system in place to provide reasonable benefits to graduates than to extend the program until the last minute and cheat with only a few tears.
It is far less burdensome to end up in a discussion with the parties concerned than to fight it out in court. In this regard, there are cases where people have been consulted after they have been taken to court as a result of handling the case without a lawyer. However, it would be far better for the management to consult with a lawyer at an early stage, conclude a proper contract and send the graduates off with a good feeling than to be taken to court.
It’s time to realize that lawyers (as long as they want the parties to be happy) are there to save the parties and the company time and money, and they should be able to arrange for a quick resolution. What the management doesn’t realize is that it is only their bias towards lawyers and their own desire to solve the problem by themselves. It is hard to say, as there are occasional exceptions, but a departure by agreement is much happier than a departure by trial.
Culture fit is very important in organizations
Maintaining culture fit in an organization is essential as part of sustainable management and as a foundation for the selection and implementation of strategies, so it is described above.