1. Growth and personal value-added
We often talk about growth, so let’s take a look at how an enterprise affects the growth of an employee?
-- environment.
The enterprise is our second "alma mater". Is the alma mater a famous school? How big is the area and staff size? How many "good teachers" there are, how many outstanding students (classmates), how many "good projects" and how many scientific "teaching" and management methods" and the number of high-quality "project resources" should be important considerations for every person in society when choosing a company to work for. (Think about how you chose a university after the college entrance examination.)
(1) Are there people in the environment who understand the methodology to lead the way (height, depth)
Most of the problems we encounter in our work must have been encountered by predecessors, and they must have summarized the corresponding steps and methods to solve them. At the high end, we call the methods and methods summarized by the experts to solve a certain problem - — Methodology.
What is the use of methodology?
Methodology is like a template for writing a paper. When you have no idea at all, you can use a certain template "Nine Elements/Methods/Models for Writing XX Papers" to write, and the result will be good. Therefore, many excellent people can talk about methodology and use methodology to guide behavior, which is highly efficient and effective.
Basically everything in a large company must be about methodology (everything must be done with methods and strategies, not fictitious metaphysics), otherwise you won’t be able to convince other colleagues (everyone’s level is good, and corporate and business training is well done. Can you How many are you fooling?).
Let me explain what I mean by metaphysics. Metaphysics is:
It sounds like words, sentences, and ideas that make sense and can be expressed, but they cannot be implemented or put into practice no matter what.
Normally, a professional management team and a research-based business team should dismantle the important ideas of top managers into specific implementable goals. This requires a strong overall industry vision, communication skills, management capabilities, experience, and professional skills. , methodology, resource channels.
What I mean is, when it comes to dismantling top-level thinking, do you expect college students to dismantle it for you?
If you don’t count on college students, the company definitely doesn’t have the corresponding planning, research departments and talents. The inability to recruit is partly because the bosses don’t know that the company needs such departments and organizational structures to solve top-level planning. question.
In small companies, bosses and leaders are more accustomed to making decisions on the fly and using metaphysical deception instead of using scientific methodology to conduct in-depth and comprehensive analysis.
Luo Yonghao once especially looked down on people who read methodological books. He himself said: "In the past, if I saw a well-dressed guy at the airport holding a book called "Win" with Jack Welch's smile on the cover, I will feel that this idiot is hopeless, but now I will read it with a book like this." (So if you haven't read yet and are still like a fool like Luo Yonghao, then you have to consider changing it. .Of all the entrepreneurs I have seen who have done well in their businesses, there is no one who does not say that young people should study more, and there is no one who does not study every day.)
It can be said that Luo Yonghao is the first famous entrepreneur who was "sanctioned" because he did not study and did not understand methodology.
The importance of methodology is self-evident. When you meet a person who preaches that theory is unimportant and reading is useless, including his belief that all scholars and practitioners who believe in, research, summarize, and create theoretical methods are stupid At this time, you should carefully examine whether this person is qualified to be your friend, because he has obviously not grown up yet.
(2) Is there an excellent team in the environment?
The role of the team is to form a "comparison environment" for common growth.
Only one excellent person is not an excellent team. An excellent team should be composed of a group of excellent people. They have endless energy, endless creativity, undying will, and "solid basic knowledge reserves" , including methodology”.
If a team is full of people who just muddle along and push the blame all day long, then how can we talk about growing together? What's more, in small businesses, whether they can recruit someone with a solid foundation of knowledge is still a problem.
(3) Wearing multiple hats, it’s not that you are good, but that no one is available
In a start-up company, you cannot learn systematic knowledge or receive training. All you can do is be a handyman who wears multiple hats, and you will never become a professional in the XX field.
To put it bluntly, one person can do everything in a small company. If you go to a big company, you can't compare with the professionalism of a screw in any field. A highly professional screw is more popular in the market than a hodgepodge. (To put it bluntly, they are not only more professional than you. , the road ahead is much wider than a hodgepodge).
Future opportunities/development (changing jobs)
Work experience in a company is our second “academic qualification”. A good company represents "prestigious schools" and "advanced academic qualifications", which are important endorsements in life.
in conclusion:
It’s not a big problem for people from a big factory to jump to a
big factory; it’s easy for people from a big factory to move to a small factory; (even if the interviewer thinks you’re inappropriate, think back: People from a big factory should still have some of the awesomeness of people from a big factory. Pass!)
People from small factories jump to small factories, hehehe;
people from small factories jump to big factories, hell mode! ! ! (Even if the interviewer thinks you are awesome, then think about it: There must be something unreliable about coming from a small factory, Pass!)
Therefore, there is a high probability that most start-up companies will die quickly, and there is a high probability that various systems are illegal. Individual employees have no money, no growth, and a bleak future. Why should we go there? Forget it if we don’t understand clearly. Then after reading my analysis, are you still willing to be deceived?
Finally, if you really want to go to a small company, I hope you can finally find a way to collect more information and examine the company like a venture capitalist: the boss’s background (school, education, experience, achievements, evaluation), core The background and data of each member of the management team (you most likely cannot see it, so the information is not dominant), management system (you most likely cannot see it either), and whether the business model is reliable or sustainable (this is the company) How do you make money? Is it cheating people out of their human form?)
Some friends mentioned in the comments that companies such as Tencent also started from small companies. How to explain this?
Wu Xiaobo summarized the first generation of Internet startups in his book "Tencent Biography". First, the founders of a number of current leading Internet companies, such as Sohu, Sina, NetEase, and Tencent, were at least [undergraduate graduates] or above in computer-related disciplines from [prestigious Chinese and foreign universities] in the 1980s and 1990s ( Readers may wish to compare what the universities and schools of your parents' generation were like, what their academic qualifications were like, whether their major was compatible with the Internet, whether their social activities during and after school were calm or they were constantly chasing new opportunities), and what they were like thirty years ago. Undergraduate and master's students are not at the same level as the undergraduate and master's graduates in 2019; secondly, the Internet wave of that year was unable to engage in rent-seeking games with the government, and drove out the outdated and overbearing state-owned enterprise groups. The unique time and space of the competitive circle (to put it bluntly, the Internet is so new that our government and state-owned enterprises did not react at all at the time, and even if they did react, they would not be able to play with it); thirdly, the success of these start-up companies is It was catalyzed by international venture capital capital twenty years ago. (Think about how old you were when you first learned about the concept of “venture capital”?)
In what era did they start their business? It was the time when the international Internet had just been born, Yahoo was rising, and Robin Li of Baidu had not yet returned to China to create Baidu.
The right time, the right location, and the talent among talents. Today, this is still a popular project target for venture capital. If these people do not succeed, it will be unforgivable. Who can succeed? Could it be that he is a wealthy entrepreneur from some small company?
So I say, if you really want to go to a small company, you might as well first learn how investors investigate a start-up company, and observe from the perspective of a venture capitalist. Is it suitable for you to invest in it?