View Single Post
Bundyo's Avatar
Posts: 4,708 | Thanked: 4,649 times | Joined on Oct 2007 @ Bulgaria
#31
Originally Posted by speculatrix View Post
indeed, there seem to be two ways for a company to manage economic difficulties
1/ cut costs - this risks damaging the company sufficiently to make the situation worse, and the best staff will take settlements and run, and cost a lot to replace
2/ work better - make better use of the staff to innovate and become more productive to maintain market share and minimise loss of profits

unfortunately, shareholders usually only reward the quick fix, ie. 1, and so directors and upper management get forced into quick and stupid actions. take a look at the share price of a company when they announce job cuts, and compare with changes when they announce new investments/strategies!
The second way is often done wrong like:
  1. Employ a software with which to detect how effective a person has been /the worst case in software development, bureaucracy is usually not taken into account/,
  2. Hire a company to do some inside interviews to weigh how effective a person would be /the problem is that the interviewers have to be more expert than the staff to actually have any idea/,
  3. Ask the lesser managers how effective their staff is /this tend to backfire as they usually get rid of who they don't like or they need all their staff, but are forced to give someone to the wolves/.

Then fire the less effective ones.

The problem is that neither of these methods is working reliably.
__________________
Technically, there are three determinate states the cat could be in: Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.