The stupidest thing in the world is to cheat. It gives unusually strong emotions, on the one hand, and on the other, it can completely emasculate, devastate, deprive you of friends and even your favorite job.
I'll tell you a couple of stories. I don’t pretend to be the truth in the highest authority, of course.
Cheating with colleagues
I'm talking about real changes, and not about introducing techniques, switching to a new CRM or task manager. Real ones are when people start working differently, and the results of their activities radically improve.
Changes quickly waste the “bank account” of relationships, both with subordinates, and with parallel, and with superiors. It’s simple mathematics: if you have managed to accumulate a relationship balance, then you spend it before the overdraft, and if you haven’t managed to, then you work on credit. And the loan has a limit.
For example, one guy wanted to change the work of a team of programmers. He knew exactly what to do and had previously shown that his plan worked (on a different sample). Well, that is. take the ready-made case and use it. The outcome for the team is simple: more results with the same effort, and more money in your pocket.
The debit balance lasted for two weeks, then credit work began. We worked according to the proposed scheme for half a month and got a noticeable improvement. But the need to work according to someone else’s scheme was straining, and gradually it outweighed it. The second half of the month we worked on the credit of relationships, like an Italian strike - it seems that we are doing as you say, but the further we go, the longer we let our sleeves down.
The result: a destroyed relationship, with a clearly positive result even in the first month. Well, naturally, they kicked out the “changer” and returned to the previous scheme and the previous results.
Change with owner
The same story with the direct beneficiary, i.e. beneficiary of the changes. There was one guy who started making changes in the office on the instructions of the owner. It started wonderfully - I received complete carte blanche and almost unlimited resources. I was wondering how much the halva was. And it went down very quickly.
Well, stupidly the profit began to grow, although the work was carried out not directly with its components, but with the supporting processes. But they, as it turned out, influenced profits so strongly and quickly that one was literally dizzy with success. From the owner.
The dude understood that he was doing everything right, and he just had to not be stupid and continue. And the owner fell into the trap of “well, that’s it, now it’ll trample on its own.” And he began to make his proposals.
At the very beginning, he was silent, taking the position of “do at least something, I don’t know what to do anymore.” And when I saw and partially understood the process of change, suddenly, out of nowhere, I remembered what I had read in books.
At first it’s gentle, like just suggesting, let’s discuss this and that. Well, the guy discussed it, explained why you shouldn’t do this. But the further it went, the more the owner began to believe that his ideas were worth something, and they should also be used.
It got to the point where the guy said: no, you’re offering bullshit, owner. You put me in charge of making changes, so I’m doing them. What do you think the owner responded? Something like “I’ll give you the *** right now.” A minute later he apologized, of course, but it was too late - it had already clicked.
The dude turned out to be stubborn and continued to stick to his line. He just stopped explaining what he was doing. And about a month later he was fired from this job. And then it was fun.
They removed him from managing the entire change project, but did not expel him from the team of this project. Another person was appointed as the leader, with directly opposite views on life. Our dude figured out what to do and did it. But the new leader only knew how to do things.
They got together and asked the dude: tell me what needs to be done. And he told them: you tell me this, and I will do it. Or turn it back. Well, word for word, the guy quit, and the change project was covered with a copper basin.
The result: not just a curtailment, but a rollback of changes, a significant drop in company performance, damaged relationships, loss of faith in changes.
Change all the way
But miracles also happen. When the implementer of change works alone and goes to the end. One acquaintance reformed the supply service this way; it included a warehouse and buyers.
At first, he succumbed to the illusion that everyone around him was friends and like-minded people and would help him in every possible way, with ideas, facts, and hands. But, fortunately for him, he quickly realized that he had to change alone.
In general, he spat and said: I’ll do everything myself. I mean, he told the owner. He got confused, they say, come on, tell me what you will do, specifically, the plan, charter, events, resources, etc. But he stubbornly resisted and that’s it: either on his own or not at all.
The owner thought about it over the weekend and decided: okay, never mind. Well, he gave me carte blanche. And I didn’t climb.
Well, the guy did everything himself. The process was reconfigured, automated, the motivation system was changed, accompanied, supported, etc. The relationship with all involved colleagues, including the owner, went into the negative. He probably didn’t reach the credit limit of his relationship with the owner, which is why the process of changes was completed.
And then a miracle happened. Well, first of all, the project itself was implemented successfully. And secondly, those who hated him sharply changed their attitude - they began to almost carry him in their arms. Well, why - the guy saved them from the eternal mistakes for which they were accustomed to raking, and their salaries increased, and, in general, they became heroes. Simply because other services still have problems, but these ones have disappeared.
In total, it turns out that if you endure an extremely low level of relationships during the process of change, then at the end this level can grow much higher than the original one. True, if the changes bring good results.
Cheat with friends
But this is the stupidest idea, because it kills friendship if one wants it and the other doesn’t. Changes in this sense are like a test, like the trip to the mountains proposed by Vysotsky with a friend.
If “he was gloomy and angry, but he walked,” the level of the relationship has temporarily dropped, but the person treats this adequately and understands what is NECESSARY. And he goes.
And if “you immediately went limp and went down,” or “stumbled and started screaming,” then the balance of the relationship was initially very low, or they went uphill too steeply.
There were two guys I knew who were trying to start an IT business. Both agreed that changes needed to be made. Not to say that they are serious - to dramatically expand the product line, change approaches to clients, optimize project activities. The essence and purpose of the changes was both understood and accepted by both.
But, alas, change is not only the essence and goal, but also work. Changes must be made like any other work. Not only dream of going to the mountains, but also crawling up, falling, freezing, starving and experiencing a lack of oxygen.
Well, one seemed to be patient, but the second “slipped and went downhill.” Well, it seems, it doesn’t matter - you can just roll back the changes and wait for a more favorable moment. But the relationship was already damaged, and the business rested on them. Well, the business is over.
So, there is no business, friendship has turned into passive hostility and mutual accusations.
Army of the “convinced”
Most guys who try to make changes can't handle the decline in relationships. They cannot live in a state where “everyone has started treating me worse.”
The decline in the relationship obscures the purpose of the change, and the benefits that are predicted or even promised - for example, an increase in income or position. We are social creatures. Thanks to the default system of the brain, which sharply increases the priority of current relationships over distant goals.
But the trick is different. Those who started changes and quit see a contradiction that haunts them: I returned the relationship to a good level, and now I’m great, but I abandoned the changes, so I’m not great. You still have to decide whether you are great or not.
They say that at this moment consciousness turns on - it is responsible for eliminating contradictions, because doesn't want to live with them. And here the choice is simple - either admit that you are dependent on relationships, and you are a good person only when they treat you well, or call the very idea of change evil.
This is how the army of those who are “convinced” is replenished—those who “understood” that the changes are nonsense. In this army, it is customary to humor a lot at the expense of “effective” managers, covens, nouveau riche, infogypsies, politicians, sycophants, etc. – everyone who is directly or indirectly related to the topic of change.
As a result, such a “convinced” person almost never returns to the idea of initiating changes. Simply because he is afraid to again experience the difficulties of losing a relationship, and experience contradiction.
Cheating with strangers
The most practical option that I have seen is to start changes when the relationship is either not yet formed or has already been damaged (including deliberately). Simply put, when there is nothing to lose.
The only thing is that you need to have a credit of trust from some decision-maker. And remember that this loan disappears very quickly.
Then simple mathematics applies: changes should bring results faster than the balance in the relationship account decreases. The easiest option is to start with changes that are small in time but noticeable in results. Do a small project that will quickly show results.
It's like an investment with a short return period. You give away the entire remainder of the relationship, sit “without money,” but very quickly return everything back with interest. As a result, the balance is higher than the original one, and the overdraft limit is increased - the decision maker already knows that you can, and next time he will endure longer.
Now you can start making larger changes. But it’s still worth remembering that they should bring results in the foreseeable future. As well as about the rate of decline of relationships.
You just need to understand: the essence of the changes is clear to few people around. The results are clear. Losses and difficulties in the process are understandable. What you are doing there and why exactly this is not clear.
While there is no result, everyone sees only the difficulties and problems you create. There is also no particular point in explaining your actions - it can turn out like in the story with the owner. Well, in principle, the motivation for your actions can only be understood by those who directly work with you, who understand the current and global goals. Pain, in short.
So, the principle is simple. We forget about relationships with everyone, including decision makers, for a short period. We do not waste time restoring these relationships until the changes have brought results. We concentrate all our efforts on the successful implementation of changes.
The faster the result is obtained, at least intermediate, but understandable to the decision maker and others, the faster the return on investment with interest will occur. Or at least cashback.
Source: habr.com