36 Krypton has set up the [36 Krypton Lead Reading] column specially for reading, screening some books worth reading, and providing some book excerpts. I hope you have a satisfying book handy to keep the reading movement going.
The nature of meetings
The "Bible · Old Testament" says: The ancestors of mankind originally spoke the same language. Between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, they discovered an exceptionally fertile land. So he settled down there, built a city, and built a prosperous city of Babylon.
Later, as their days got better and better, people were proud of their achievements, and they decided to build a tower in Babylon that reached the sky to extol their illustrious name and serve as a sign to gather brothers all over the world, so as not to be scattered. Because everyone communicated in the same language and worked together, the stepped Babel Tower was built very smoothly, and soon it was soaring into the sky.
Humans learned long ago to get work done by reaching consensus. Why reach a consensus? Consensus plays an important role in the operation of the team. Only when an organization has a consensus can it have action. Team consensus is an important means to exert the team's combat effectiveness. As the saying goes: "When everyone gathers firewood, the flame is high." At work, if everyone does not reach a consensus, it is easy to "fight in the nest". Without a good working atmosphere, everyone will not unite and cooperate, which will lead to instability of the army and disintegration of the team, and the disorganized team is a major obstacle to enterprise market competition.
Management scientist Peter Drucker said: "The reason why we meet is because in order to complete a specific job, the knowledge and experience of one person is not enough, and the knowledge and experience of several people need to be combined." This era is In an era of rapid development, information is changing rapidly and competition is becoming more and more intense. This requires the enterprise to have better control in the general direction of strategy, principle, concept, vision, etc., and to establish consensus within the organization, so that everyone can "work together".
In order to control the general direction, business organizations have come up with an excellent method, that is, to hold meetings to discuss. Only through the exchange of information and cooperation and sharing through meetings, can we better control the progress of the work, which is also the effect that ordinary private discussions or departmental exchanges cannot achieve.
A meeting is to provide as many opportunities as possible for all parties to communicate in the general direction, but in fact, the purpose of a meeting is not to communicate itself, but to reach a consensus. A successful meeting not only controls the meeting time reasonably, but also cooperates with each other. The content and process of the meeting are open and transparent, and the meeting results are clear and effective. Most of the participants can reach a consensus through the meeting.
From the perspective of conference organizers, the first thing to consider is whether the conference is necessary. The workplace is a big mix, and there are all kinds of different problems all the time. Does every problem need a meeting to solve it? Of course not. Some issues do not require meetings. Meetings for trivial matters are actually a waste of resources and missed opportunities. But for matters such as cross-departmental cooperation, company strategy control, and principle establishment, can it be said that meetings are not required?
Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the purpose of the meeting of the meeting organizer, establish worthy and executable meeting goals, so that the participants can understand the strategic direction of the meeting as soon as possible and reach a consensus as soon as possible. Robert's rules of procedure, the first "principle of the center of the motion" states: "A motion is the basic unit of the meeting." The mover, the motion of the action is also. The content of the meeting should be a series of motions, and they must be specific, clear and actionable proposals for action. Motion first and then discuss, no motion without discussion.
The organizer of the meeting should control the meeting process. Generally, the meeting time should not be too long. The organizer should know how to converge, complete the meeting goal within a fixed time, have control over the process, and complete things through certain rules. Robert's rules of procedure are a good point to control the meeting process - "principle of neutrality": the basic responsibility of the meeting host is to follow the rules to referee and implement procedures, and try not to express his own opinions or speak to others. indicate a tendency.
"Principle of Equal Opportunities": Anyone who speaks must signal the moderator before speaking. Those who raise their hands first, but who have not yet spoken on the current motion, take precedence over those who have spoken. At the same time, the moderator should try to give the opposing sides the opportunity to speak in turn to maintain balance.
"Principle of complete speech": Do not interrupt other people's speech. There is a time limit for each person to speak each time (for example, the agreement should not exceed two minutes); there is also a limit on the number of times each person can speak on the same motion (for example, the agreement should not exceed two).
"One at a time": Statements must not deviate from the current pending issue. Only after one motion has been dealt with can another motion be introduced or discussed.
These are the use of rules to escort the meeting and make the meeting more efficient and transparent, so the generation of consensus requires certain rules.
Finally, a good meeting organizer also considers the mind divergence of the meeting. Unchangeable rules and regulations are not beneficial to members of the organization, and in many cases, they will limit the imagination of members. In order to spread the thinking of the participants, the meeting organizer can set roles in the meeting, cooperate with others, and work together to spread the thinking of all the members. Sometimes pre-designed roles are put into the meeting, which is also a means of advancing the meeting, which is helpful for members to explore new ideas and start brainstorming for imagination.
On the one hand, the conference was launched to let the organizers understand the ideas of the participants, and on the other hand, it was also to let the participants understand each other and enhance consensus. Participants discussed matters in the meeting, respected the communication rules, and formed an atmosphere of dealing with things rather than people. Although there may be "daggers drawn" in the process of the meeting, it is precisely because of these discussions that it is easier for them to Agree quickly.
Tencent often formulates some reform plans through meetings. These plans are not all proposed by experts, and some employees PK with each other at the meeting. The sparks of brainstorming can sometimes solve many things that are usually discussed but unresolved.
It will be more efficient and orderly than private discussion and research to generate consensus at the meeting and then execute the processing. Many people have such a mentality. When everyone reaches a consensus on one thing and puts it on the agenda at the meeting, the executor will pay more attention to it. In a sense, the meeting creates a sense of ritual that makes it more serious.
PPT paradox: The point is that points have power
Ding Xiao in "The Cultivation of "White Bone Spirit" said: "Let me tell you one thing, if you want to survive in the workplace, you must learn to express yourself, and don't care whether the other party knows what you want to express or whether you are disdainful. Even if you are skeptical, as long as you feel that the things you are about to state and the views you express are beneficial to yourself, you must speak out boldly. Because only when you express it can people understand you and win for yourself opportunity."
We often say that point (opinion) must have power (strength), but many professionals do not even have point, let alone point power. We always think that other people understand our ideas, but in fact they may not understand anything. "I thought he knew everything, but he didn't know anything." This is a taboo in the workplace.
Because of poor communication, there is information asymmetry, and the asymmetry of information leads to a superficial or even unknown understanding of the individual, and all of this is due to the neglect of the expression of personal opinions or the wrong direction of expression. The establishment of one's own opinions in the workplace is very important. It is a means of conveying personal opinions in the workplace and a way of building personal brand and influence.
When conveying opinions, individuals must abide by the principle of "content over form", do not pursue too much to pile up their opinions with gorgeous rhetoric, and pay attention to the key points. Many people do not have a point when expressing their ideas, they don’t know what they are talking about for a long time, and the persuasiveness of their views is not powerful.
Some people pay too much attention to the form and ignore the content of the point of view, which leads to the failure of communication and communication, and does not leave their own personal brand in the hearts of others. Without your own personal brand, it is easy to lose your competitiveness. Often, fancy expressions are not as real as cutting to the point.
So how can you express your personal point more effectively? There are many companies now who like to use PPT to assist in speeches during meetings. In fact, for the introduction of products, we do not advocate the use of PPT at all times. Sometimes too formal expressions will cause cumbersomeness, and PPT is a formal product. Excessive pursuit of formalization will lead to ignoring the effective expression of content and viewpoints, which is one of the reasons why many people do not like to use PPT. It is obviously a very small matter, and it has to be expressed in a formal PPT, but it will cause disgust.
For example, when you introduce your home to others, you can clearly state it in one sentence, but you have to make a PPT to introduce it, including the source of the house, house price, area, decoration style, surrounding environment, etc., which seems redundant. . Especially in a tense work environment, more people consider whether their work efficiency will be dragged down by PPT presentations, and audiences are reluctant to spend their time on unimportant things.
In general, there is no need to use formal expressions in occasions where formal expressions are not required. Too much emphasis on form will affect the creation of content, and there will be a lack of persuasive views in expressing and communicating. This is how Tencent people are. They are calm about the use of PPT, and generally do not use PPT to express and communicate opinions except in formal occasions.
So when exactly should PPT be used? Not advocating the use of PPT does not mean that PPT is not used at any time. The key is to know how to think carefully and choose your own way of expression depending on the occasion. It is necessary to use PPT to convey opinions in formal occasions, so as to show the other party a sense of importance.
When making PPT, special attention should be paid to the support of the content. For example, PPT is required for internal training and cross-level reporting. In formal occasions, the expression of a sense of form is indispensable. However, the use of PPT to convey opinions should pay attention to the structure of the content, or should follow the principle of "content over form". It's not enough to just pile up a bunch of beautiful charts in PPT, and it's not practical to be beautiful.
Reid Hoffman, the founder of LinkedIn, disclosed to everyone present at a 2013 presentation the PPT he made when he sought financing from the Greylock Fund. This PPT was later called Make a "words of thousands of gold" PPT. But if you say how good-looking and attractive this PPT is, it doesn't. This PPT designed by Reid Hoffman can be said to be a PPT that has no aesthetics, looks messy and lacks a sense of design. However, such a PPT successfully helped him get the $10 million Series B financing provided by the investors in the end.
The reason is that Reid Hoffman's PPT looks messy and has no aesthetics, but the content presentation is perfect, the views are well-founded, down-to-earth and not frivolous. Content is the most important thing for investors. For the object of the presentation, whether the PPT is beautiful or not, or whether the design is unique, is not the most important thing.
A beautiful PPT will indeed add points to the presentation, but the focus of investors is still the content. Few investors will be fooled by the appearance of things. Investors are rational and cannot invest in you just because they look good.
Successful presentations in formal occasions depend on the pragmatism of the PPT content structure on the one hand, and personal branding on the other hand. The content may be the same, if your opponent also values the structure of the content, then to win this competition, it is more important to have a personal brand showdown.
Another important reason for Reid Hoffman's success in seeking financing from the Greylock Fund is that the speaker of the PPT is Hoffman himself, not someone else. At that time, Reid Hoffman was known as the "King of Networking", and he was already one of the famous angel investors in Silicon Valley, and his personal brand had already made investors trust him. Sometimes personal branding takes precedence over content, which is the highest level of competitiveness.
"It is not allowed to say things that cannot be technically done"
Fred Gibbons, a consultant professor at Stanford University's Institute of Electrical Engineering, once told his students the story of "one button" for Apple's mobile phone: It is said that the earliest Apple product designs also had many buttons, but Jobs I am particularly dissatisfied with this. He personally advocates minimalism and believes that if you can do simple things, you must not complicate things. He asked his colleagues who developed and researched iPhones to "make products with only one button", which was a whimsical idea at the time. At that time, there was no mobile phone with only one button on the market, and the colleagues who developed the mobile phone immediately said that it was impossible to develop a mobile phone with only one button, and there was a fierce quarrel with Jobs.
For Jobs' insistence, many people thought that he was crazy at that time. His request could not be achieved technically. How could a mobile phone have only one button? At that time, someone asked Jobs: "Is there anything in this world that has only one button?" Desperately, Jobs took the entire project team to the bathroom, pointed to the toilet and said, "I only need one button. I'll say it again. Again, all I need is a button."
In the eyes of Jobs, many things can be solved with technology, but people are not willing to imagine it boldly. There are many ways to solve difficulties in this world, and difficulties are only temporary. Never deny the ability of yourself and others. If Jobs hadn't insisted at the time, would we still see the Home button on Apple's phones?
Challenges and attempts sometimes bring many unexpected rewards. If you haven't done this thing, it's a cowardice to conclude that you can't complete it. Especially in product development and design, it is not allowed to say anything that is technically impossible. You haven't tried it, how do you know it won't work?
There is a saying: "Some doors are closed, you have to approach and push; some doors are closed, but they are not locked, you have to come closer; some doors seem to be locked, but they are actually locked. Just open it; some doors are indeed locked tightly, but there are doors next to them... don't wait and see from a distance and make assumptions; don't tell yourself that you can't before doing many things."
When many people encounter difficulties at work, they will often make excuses for themselves, saying that they cannot do it without strong enough personal ability. But is this really the case? Let me tell you a little story: a child moved a stone, and his father encouraged him: "child, as long as you do your best, you will be able to lift it!" In the end, the child failed to lift the stone, and he told his father: "I have tried my best. At this time, the father replied: "You didn't try your best, because I was by your side, but you didn't ask me for help." This story tells us that the boundary judgment of the realization problem cannot be based only on our own personal ability. When self-capacity is insufficient, we must learn to deal with problems flexibly, which can be magnified to the capabilities of the entire organization, and we must learn to use the resources around us.
Some managers are accustomed to starting from themselves and ignoring the strength of the team, which is very dangerous. Faced with a difficult project, because it is difficult for me to complete it, I conclude that the team cannot complete it, and I am afraid of difficulties, which leads to the failure of the project. This happens from time to time. When encountering difficulties, don’t just consider your own abilities, but pay attention to the resources around you and the strength of your team. In many cases, integrating resources is what managers should do.
Once the self-capacity is insufficient to deny the development prospects of the project, such managers may be difficult to achieve great things. Don't forget, the strength of the team should not be underestimated, "three stooges, one Zhuge Liang".
Tencent CEO Ma Huateng is a stubborn person, but at the same time he knows how to be flexible and is good at using all the resources around him to solve problems. In his professional creed, he also does not allow anything technically impossible. There is a Tencent email story that shows Ma Huateng's dedication and seriousness.
Once, Ma Huateng asked one of his employees to add some kind of anchor tag function to the page, which would make the operation more convenient for users. After the user performs a complex operation on a specific area of the page, the page can return to the original position where the action was triggered, so that the user does not turn over from the beginning again.
The employee asked the technician, and the technician replied, "It can't be achieved at all." So he replied to Ma Huateng by email: "This is technically impossible." After about two minutes, Ma Huateng replied: " What did you say?" The technician realized that he had said something wrong, and wrote back to Ma Huateng: "Sorry, let's find a way."
After a while, Ma Huateng sent him a long letter. In the first paragraph of the letter, he warned him: "What is not allowed in Tencent is technically impossible." Then, he listed three or four things for him. HTML (Hyper Text Markup Language) experts in each department listed their names and GM (game master) names, and asked the employee to contact them directly for technical support. As a result, the masters Ma Huateng listed for him, through collective efforts, did complete the task.
Whether a thing can be done technically is closely related to the executor's own professional skills and his ability to think differently. To accomplish a seemingly impossible thing, you must first dare to try, and only after taking that step will you be qualified to judge the whole thing. Secondly, the boundary judgment of realization problems should not be based only on one's own personal ability, but should be magnified to the ability of the entire organization, and one must learn to use the resources around them. The strength of the team is often beyond imagination.
When you think leaders are more stupid than you...
Many newcomers to the workplace have had this experience: the leader assigned a task and asked you to complete it, but in fact you did not agree with the leader's arrangement, and even felt that the task assigned by the leader was unreasonable. At this time, what will you do? Is it to directly refute the leader's arrangement on the spot, and bravely express your true thoughts? Or even though you are reluctant, but still in accordance with the requirements of the leadership, to complete the task without compromise?
In the workplace, there are many times when you do not fully understand certain ideas and decisions of the leader, and even feel that the leader is quite stupid, always making some "unrealistic" and "problematic" decisions, and firmly asking the employees to implement them. . But in fact, are leaders really stupid?
There was once such a post on "Tianya": a girl who had just entered the workplace asked "Why do I always think that the tasks assigned by the leader are problematic?" She also put forward her own suggestions appropriately, but the leader still insisted that she take photos Tasks are scheduled for execution. Later, she discussed this matter with the seniors of the company. The seniors told her that she had encountered such a situation when she first came, but as she grew up, the seniors found that the arrangement of the leaders was not wrong, but the thinking was limited at that time. Convince yourself that your leadership's decisions are irrational.
There is no absolute right or wrong in the workplace. People's differences in views are only due to the different perspectives of each person's thinking. As an employee, most of the problems are considered from the implementation level. As a manager, the information obtained is richer and the thinking space is broader, so thinking about problems will be more strategic. In addition to the execution of the task, managers are also concerned about the optimal timing of the task, the cost required, and the influencing factors involved.
A friend who once participated in the development of QQ synchronization assistant products in Tencent told me a little story: when Tencent wanted to enrich the auxiliary functions of QQ, many internal product development teams reported auxiliary tool projects, such as group assistants, QQ voice calls, QQ video calls, file transfers, remote presentations... Naturally, it also includes the QQ synchronization assistant she participated in.
During that time, she applied for more bandwidth and cloud service system support for the QQ synchronization assistant project many times, but the leader always asked her to wait, so she did not understand the attitude of the leader very much. In one case, the leader even specifically found the reason for inquiries, and submitted the feasibility analysis of the project to the leader many times, emphasizing the advantages of the project. But the leader still insisted that she wait a little longer.
Later, a friend said that it took a long time for her to gradually understand why the leader kept making her wait. Because the QQ synchronization assistant at that time was not particularly "strong demand" compared to other projects. As a manager with various resources in hand, leaders will naturally tilt resources to the QQ voice phone project that was more urgent and easy to achieve at that time.
When everyone is busy reporting projects and applying for resources, leaders need to compare the importance of each project, and then decide the allocation and sequence of resources according to the importance of the project. Bandwidth and cloud service system support resources are both limited, which is more important, and it will become clear if you think about it carefully.
Therefore, when you are still thinking about problems at the employee level, don’t always think that your leader is stupid. On the contrary, you should make your way of thinking as close as possible to the way of thinking of the leader. Here are a few tips for newcomers to the workplace to help them communicate more effectively with leaders, and most importantly, try to avoid the communication minefield:
First, what you think is wrong is not necessarily wrong. Usually in an enterprise, the higher the position, the greater the amount of information it has. Therefore, there is actually information asymmetry between you and your leader. On this basis, people with more information will naturally think more comprehensively and more in line with the current situation; as a subordinate, if the To question, even if occasionally right, but wrong more often.
Second, remember the truth that "the loss caused by disobedience to the leader's command is far greater than the loss caused by the leader's wrong decision." When the leader has made a decision, and you are questioning whether the decision is right, it means you are in danger. Many times, an enterprise is destroyed by these "self-righteous" people, but these "self-righteous" people do not know it, and even think that they are very dedicated and are thinking of the overall situation.
There is such a plot in the TV series "Bright Sword". When summarizing why the millions of Kuomintang troops were completely defeated all at once, someone said a very classic sentence: "The place less than 100 meters away from our current position (Nanjing Political Science Institute) used to be the Kuomintang Ministry of National Defense War Office, until today, I still think my work experience over a year there is something to learn from, and the orders issued from there are not entirely stupid. As my colleagues once joked 'The orders of the National Army are made by Made by genius, executed by idiots'."
When you are questioning your leadership, please think about these two questions: First, is your question reasonable? Second, are you advocating an approach that takes the overall situation into consideration, or is it a foolish act that is beyond failure?
Then, please conscientiously implement the spirit of leadership. Although no one is perfect in this world, your leader will indeed make mistakes, and we do not encourage blind obedience to the leader, but when we want the leader to change his concept, we should first seriously study the spirit of leadership.
Of course, if the leader turns out to be really wrong, you should also trust him to correct himself. If there is no basic trust between the two parties, it is difficult to get the job done.
When the idea that "leaders are stupider than you" starts to appear in your mind, please remind yourself that different perspectives in the workplace often lead to people in different positions seeing different things. Many times what leaders can see, employees may not be seen. It is wise to maintain active communication when you have a problem.
This article is excerpted from "Tencent Work Law"
brief introduction
Why do people work? How to deal with the relationship between self and work and maximize the willingness to work? What are the main factors that affect the results of work? Whether you are in a comfort zone or a bottleneck period, when you understand the meaning of work from the perspective of yourself, the company, and the society, you can truly stimulate your work potential.
Tencent is undoubtedly a company that is good at "promoting boulders to the top", and its employees often have a clearer understanding of their own goals in the process of understanding the company's goals. This book analyzes Tencent's working methods from the perspective of a large social system, and closely restores how Tencent on the run sees its present and future. From the basic work consensus of Tencent people, such as how to send emails and use PPT, to the specific methods of returning to the "user-oriented" for value creation, to "treating employees as users" and supporting "Worley Fighting", which are commonly used within Tencent but seem contradictory Common sense management methodology, and then "thinking from the perspective of employees", make them proud of being "goose factory workers".