A specialist who takes over management functions
Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2025 8:45 am
While working on a new solution, he butts in with comments like, “Western companies do it differently,” or “At my previous place of work, they did it this way.” He promotes ideas that he cannot be sure will work.
Why, for what purpose? There can be two reasons:
The management, having learned about his initiative, will allow him to take direct part in the developments, which will be good.
If this does not happen (that is, they do not allow participation in the developments), then the person will be able to calmly express his dissatisfaction. After all, he proposed a different order, but this one was accepted. This means that now you can safely condemn everything, and the team will understand, even give moral support, which is also important. After all, an employee who criticizes the order, as if he is doing badly, and he does not want to feel alone. Colleagues will be on his side if he is dissatisfied with the existing order, having the "official" right to do so.
At the moment of delivering benefits of reaching overseas chinese consumers in europe information to the team, the "interceptor" tries to find out everything before others. Of course, this gives a lot of advantages. Here, for example, we can cite the privatization process (and in all countries this happens in the same way): first of all, the legal sphere is affected, and then - all the others. Laws become known to a narrow circle of people, and the rest do not delve into it so thoroughly.
An employee who is inclined to take over control tries to have his work controlled as early as possible. It is not so easy to explain why this is necessary. The so-called Russian style of work involves a long "warm-up". Then, when the deadlines are pressing - a "jump", and in the end the task still remains slightly unfulfilled.
The one taking over control is based on this principle:
The first behavior pattern is when a person does not want to take on the job, or understands that he will not be able to cope properly. And then he leads the manager to the idea in advance that the result will be weak, that is, he does not give the boss the right not to know this. Such an employee asks a lot of questions, often asks for clarifications.
As a result, they don't expect much from him, they see that the deadlines are not yet burning, but they don't count on a good result either. And that's what the "interceptor" needs: he didn't overwork himself, and he didn't finish the job, and they didn't scold him too much. He slowly but surely conveys to the manager in advance that he has no right to not know.
The second behavior model: it often happens that at the end of any business you can expect unpleasant surprises. For example, for builders, eternal "deficiencies" are a common occurrence. So the employee taking over control can start solving important issues at the very last stage.
And in the end, he leaves everything as is, unfinished. Here, the boss's job is to monitor the actions of the staff and prevent such a scheme.
In the matter of applying sanctions, the initiative is also intercepted. How exactly? For example, for completing a task only 80%, a penalty is imposed. But an employee of the "control interceptor" type working in the company, on the contrary, gives his subordinates an incentive.
He explains it this way: initially it was hard to count on even 60%, but we managed to do as much as 80%! If you want to punish me, go ahead, but we managed to show a very good result! Everyone understands this perfectly well, and they can’t bring themselves to punish. Or such a person tries to punish one of the guilty parties more harshly, thus diverting attention from himself. That is, he rushes to apply sanctions, and then the one who could punish him himself gets confused and doesn’t do it.
Why, for what purpose? There can be two reasons:
The management, having learned about his initiative, will allow him to take direct part in the developments, which will be good.
If this does not happen (that is, they do not allow participation in the developments), then the person will be able to calmly express his dissatisfaction. After all, he proposed a different order, but this one was accepted. This means that now you can safely condemn everything, and the team will understand, even give moral support, which is also important. After all, an employee who criticizes the order, as if he is doing badly, and he does not want to feel alone. Colleagues will be on his side if he is dissatisfied with the existing order, having the "official" right to do so.
At the moment of delivering benefits of reaching overseas chinese consumers in europe information to the team, the "interceptor" tries to find out everything before others. Of course, this gives a lot of advantages. Here, for example, we can cite the privatization process (and in all countries this happens in the same way): first of all, the legal sphere is affected, and then - all the others. Laws become known to a narrow circle of people, and the rest do not delve into it so thoroughly.
An employee who is inclined to take over control tries to have his work controlled as early as possible. It is not so easy to explain why this is necessary. The so-called Russian style of work involves a long "warm-up". Then, when the deadlines are pressing - a "jump", and in the end the task still remains slightly unfulfilled.
The one taking over control is based on this principle:
The first behavior pattern is when a person does not want to take on the job, or understands that he will not be able to cope properly. And then he leads the manager to the idea in advance that the result will be weak, that is, he does not give the boss the right not to know this. Such an employee asks a lot of questions, often asks for clarifications.
As a result, they don't expect much from him, they see that the deadlines are not yet burning, but they don't count on a good result either. And that's what the "interceptor" needs: he didn't overwork himself, and he didn't finish the job, and they didn't scold him too much. He slowly but surely conveys to the manager in advance that he has no right to not know.
The second behavior model: it often happens that at the end of any business you can expect unpleasant surprises. For example, for builders, eternal "deficiencies" are a common occurrence. So the employee taking over control can start solving important issues at the very last stage.
And in the end, he leaves everything as is, unfinished. Here, the boss's job is to monitor the actions of the staff and prevent such a scheme.
In the matter of applying sanctions, the initiative is also intercepted. How exactly? For example, for completing a task only 80%, a penalty is imposed. But an employee of the "control interceptor" type working in the company, on the contrary, gives his subordinates an incentive.
He explains it this way: initially it was hard to count on even 60%, but we managed to do as much as 80%! If you want to punish me, go ahead, but we managed to show a very good result! Everyone understands this perfectly well, and they can’t bring themselves to punish. Or such a person tries to punish one of the guilty parties more harshly, thus diverting attention from himself. That is, he rushes to apply sanctions, and then the one who could punish him himself gets confused and doesn’t do it.