| Author | Message | ||
| J. Grande (Jay)
Member Username: Jay Post Number: 511 Registered: 10-2001 |
Dave I agree with you. If you show loyalty to your workers they will show loyalty to you. I've had one employee for the past 5 years. I got him straight out of highschool co-op class. He's worked hard and knows the job. I'm thinking of taking him on as a part owner of my company. Now he will work even harder because he has an interest in the companies growth and I have a helper for life. Common sense is usually found when you get rid of the lawyers (sorry  ) telling you what you can and can't get away with! Martin, I saw that on 60 minutes last night. Very interesting. The people love him and work hard for the company. | ||
| 89TCab (Jmg)
Member Username: Jmg Post Number: 254 Registered: 9-2001 |
Generally, I find most good companies are run by folks taht take care of their people. I hear people whine a lot about how their copany doesn't take care of them but when I ask what they have done to make a difference or delivery exceptional effort, they look at me as though I have asked them to donate a kidney. My view when managing folks is to figure out how to get 100% of their effort each and everyday, as a team we can then deliver more than we could as individuals. | ||
| Martin (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 2606 Registered: 5-2001 |
Dave in corporate Amerika (maybe even the corporate World) you are alone with a few. There was an interesting 60 Minutes about the president of Malden Mills last night. He appears to be the exception. Was agreat piece of how things should be run. As in other topics before I believe part of the blame is the way the average people start to invest in the stock market and "expect" certain earnings. Nobody looks for the future growth and what is right to do in the long run but for the short term profit, make a buck, drain the company and move on to the next. Small business and some middle size companies still have the ethical sense of a "good name". You and me are probably the last out there! | ||
| Dave Wapinski (Davewapinski)
Member Username: Davewapinski Post Number: 297 Registered: 8-2001 |
Some of the chat members might have some insight into this. Does it make economic sense to look after one's workers? In US Government Management Courses, I was taught that a leader should look after one's mission, one's workers, and then self. Looking after my workers, I was able to turn a problem ammuniation depot around and then move more ammuniation per person hour and equipment hour than any other depot world wide. However, it seems that many executives look after self, company a distant second, and the people are not even on the radar scope. It seems the executives prosper and the companies/people do not do well. I have always thought that the increased costs of looking after one's people was more than offset by increased production, increased quality,increased loyality, etc. Am I wrong? I have always thought it paid to be an ethical leader. For example if it took 100 k to fix a problem, but lawsuits from problem might only cost 50 k, it was best to fix the problem. Not only the right thing to do, but also saves court battles, time, good will, etc. I seem to be in the minority in this feeling. Am I wrong? Any thoughts or experiences? |