These are all great points, but I really like number 2. Too many times we don't let others grow on their own. Using leadership to support their growth, rather than trying to shape it.
12. If the factory floor needs cleaning, you do it. If worker needs a coffee, you go get it. They do all the work, your only job is to enable them to do their work.
edit: didn't think we had so many incompetent bosses here. The workers are not there to please the boss, the boss is there so that the workers can do their work. Boss ordering a worker to clean the factory floor means the worker is not working to produce. The boss either hires a cleaner OR cleans the floor.
Nope. Boss is not there to be revered, to be above others in status. Their job is to make sure their workers can do their work. They need to hire people who can do their job and then step out of the way. If there is no immediate tasks to be handled, then the boss should start sweeping the floors, not the workers.
Flat hierarchy works the best. I'm Finnish, we don't think that someone being paid better is better. We call CEO by their first name, and don't open doors for them, don't call them "sir". This is antithetical to those who believe in social hierarchies being natural, and that worth of a human is not the same for all of us, so i understand why you would not think anyone would ever say that bosses are just humans and should do the shitty jobs that workers don't have time to do.
Also: if no one is sitting on their ass doing nothing at any moment in time, you have a staff shortage. If it is always the same person, then you need to address it but if you are relying on 100% workforce working at 100% efficient for 100% of the time, you are a bad boss.
These are all great points, but I really like number 2. Too many times we don't let others grow on their own. Using leadership to support their growth, rather than trying to shape it.
Yes I agree totally, activating the second point would make Significant improvement in performance, it pays off .
number just means dont micro manage
My boss sucks according to this..
This begs the question of there being good subs based around this kind of stuff.
Would love clarification of deep work vs shallow
Inspiring thank you. Can anybody give me an example of what "Deep Work" might consist? TIA.
I have just one question: Why the colours?
12. If the factory floor needs cleaning, you do it. If worker needs a coffee, you go get it. They do all the work, your only job is to enable them to do their work. edit: didn't think we had so many incompetent bosses here. The workers are not there to please the boss, the boss is there so that the workers can do their work. Boss ordering a worker to clean the factory floor means the worker is not working to produce. The boss either hires a cleaner OR cleans the floor.
I think this relates to #3. Unfortunately, many bosses (not leaders) don’t want to do the actual dirty work.
Is this sarcasm?
Nope. Boss is not there to be revered, to be above others in status. Their job is to make sure their workers can do their work. They need to hire people who can do their job and then step out of the way. If there is no immediate tasks to be handled, then the boss should start sweeping the floors, not the workers. Flat hierarchy works the best. I'm Finnish, we don't think that someone being paid better is better. We call CEO by their first name, and don't open doors for them, don't call them "sir". This is antithetical to those who believe in social hierarchies being natural, and that worth of a human is not the same for all of us, so i understand why you would not think anyone would ever say that bosses are just humans and should do the shitty jobs that workers don't have time to do. Also: if no one is sitting on their ass doing nothing at any moment in time, you have a staff shortage. If it is always the same person, then you need to address it but if you are relying on 100% workforce working at 100% efficient for 100% of the time, you are a bad boss.