How To Get Along With Leaders Who Lack Ideas

< p > < strong > my unit has changed leadership, and this leader has a very soft ear. Anyone who listens to everything will listen to it. Then it is wrong to change it again. If such a leader is not allowed to do so, but who can guarantee it? No matter how well I do my job, how should I get along with leaders? < /strong > /p >

< p > < strong > Dr. Zheng answers: < /strong > /p >

< p > the old revolution will also encounter new problems.

Most of the leaders will be strong or at least very a href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > decisionless /a. Many of the leaders I have met have no real leader.

To combat your enthusiasm, some praise your attitude, but only take your advice as a kind of opinion. Some leaders are fully aware of your attitude and enthusiasm. At the same time, you definitely respond to your suggestions. You will selectively give one or two points to let you know the true thoughts of your leader. That is to say, leaders will interact with people who offer advice on the spot. I am basically a leader of this kind. Most leaders are noncommittal, but show that they have heard clearly and will consider your opinion, and finish your own leadership to make decisions. There are very few leaders who do not want others to speak, and their attitude is cold. Some of the leaders I met in the past thirteen years were very willing to listen to you. They seemed very open and good. But in fact, they had their own judgement and opinions in mind.

Of course, every leader is actually different in personalization, but the basic type is probably about that. If he wants to become a leader, he must have his own ideas in his own bones. Otherwise, how can he be a leader? The greatest work and role of leaders is to make decisions. A person who lacks ideas is not able to make effective decisions. People who cannot make effective decisions can not be leaders, or at least not qualified leaders.

< /p >

< p > of course, according to my experience, I would rather believe that the situation is not as simple as that described by the managers themselves. The main reason is that the leader has not been familiar with the situation for a long time before he takes office, so he has to listen more to what people say and how they think it should be done, but this does not mean that his people are a very independent person.

When a leader enters a business, it will take some time to adapt to it. Some people will adapt to it quickly. Some people will adapt slowly. It depends on two factors: first, the personal ability of the leader, especially the adaptability of learning, and two, whether the leader has the experience of doing business in the new enterprise.

The performance of leadership in adaptation period may be just a temporary expedient, and may not be the whole performance of the leader's personality, personality and ability.

< /p >

< p > if such a period of adaptation is relatively weak, even when some leaders enter a new business, they tend to be weak and weak in order to observe the true reaction of all the colleagues around them, so as to achieve a faster and more thorough understanding of the leadership of many of their colleagues. The manager should take the following methods to get the trust of the new leader faster and more: < /p >

< p > < strong > 1. It is as natural as old leaders but respectfully treated the new leader; < /strong > /p >

＜p＞　　＜strong＞二、要多留点心，学会察言观色，在工作接触中仔细观察新领导的＜a href="//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp"＞需求＜/a＞，＜/strong＞尤其是在发现新领导对于与自己汇报的工作或某人某事表现出明显或隐藏的疑惑时，主动就新领导关心的人和事多做一些客观公正但不露声色的介绍，目的在于主动帮助新领导尽快了解公司情况，满足新领导来公司时间不长但希望快速熟悉公司人事的愿望;但切勿过分热情，以免让人产生巴结新领导的错觉，更不能乱说，扰乱新领导个人视听;乱说的后果是严重的，因为新领导迟早会了解到所有事情真相，如果你一开始说的就是非常客观公正的，那么你将给新领导留下非常深刻的好印象，如果你是乱说的，从此之后你就在新领导心目中留下了不良记录;＜/p＞

< p > < strong > three, when I am not very familiar with the new leader, do not rush to make an evaluation of the personality, personality and ability of the new leader. < /strong > in fact, many leaders do not really want to listen to you when they ask you advice, but rather try to understand your attitude, position and personality through your answer, and want to know your true opinion of something or someone.

< /p >

< p > of course, it can not be ruled out that the judgment made by the manager is basically correct. The leader may be really a leader without any ideas. So what should the manager do to avoid adverse events in the face of such a leader? According to my own experience and management thinking, there are ways to manage it. The main management recommendations are as follows: < /p >

< p > < strong > 1. The first principle of dealing with vulnerable leaders is sincerely "a href=" //www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "respecting < /a >.

No matter whether he is strong or weak, he is still a leader. His hands still hold the power of killing his position. If he wants to use it, he will be able to use it to influence your future and interests in /strong.

A lot of smart people who are not smart but smart themselves often start to self inflate at a glance when their leaders are not strong enough. They are unrespectful to leaders or consciously or unconsciously. They tend to despise or despise even more of their leaders. The attitude between them is very bad. They feel that they do not cooperate with themselves to be leaders and take leaders seriously. But before long, he will understand what leaders are.

If he leads the whole process, he will generally be worse, and eventually form a vicious circle with the leadership reaction. The result is not that he is damaged or at least two.

The fact is that the weaker leaders need more respect. As long as you respect your leadership from the bottom of your heart, even if you have a level difference, you still have some basic judgement and management abilities. When others do not take him seriously, and you are taking him as a real leader by eight means, in contrast, your advantages will be immediately displayed. Leaders should always employ people, who are to be used, and of course those who are able to do things for themselves, so that even if others are stronger than you, career opportunities are likely to fall on your brother first.

This strategy does not look very good at all, rather stupid, but in fact it is very intelligent and stupid, and the way of doing things is very positive and honest, and the effect is not bad.

{page_break} < /p >

The second principles of "P > < strong > two, weak minded and less minded leaders should be consciously strengthened and more requested to report.

＜/strong＞请示汇报并不象有些不懂管理的人以为的那样纯粹是形式主义，请示汇报其实在管理上一是必须的，二是作用很关键的，原因在于：一，请示汇报的目的是为了让领导随时随地了解掌握我们工作的进度和成果情况，让领导知道我们的一切工作正在按照他当时决策的意思在正常甚至优秀地运转，这可以让领导更好地把握全局;二，请示汇报其实也是一种下级对于上级的尊重和认可的表示，表示我心理完全认可你这个领导，所以我会比较多地来向你请示汇报工作，我也认可你作为领导的才能、能力，所以我请示汇报工作的同时也是在向你请教和寻求建议与帮助，这样做的好处就是让领导不但了解自己的工作，而且对自己的动向和人品和行为感觉放心，领导在心理上对你有了安全感，而且又了解了你每天在干什么工作、你自己是怎么想的、你最近跟谁在打交道、

What is the specific content of dealing with, your basic views and so on? After the fact, if others want to speak ill of you or make a rumor in front of the leader, he will have a very low probability of success. Who will doubt what a subordinate he knows very well?

Like this case, leaders should have more initiative to communicate with leaders, so that leaders can understand their real work as much as possible at any time and anywhere. Then people will be more likely to change their own work by random leaders, huh.

< /p >

< p > < strong > three. We should try our best to provide more detailed and reasonable proposals for vulnerable leaders.

< /strong > because of the lack of independent leaders in the ability to analyze and judge problems, they are not as strong as many powerful leaders. If a strong leader tells you what you want to do and how to do it, he will immediately analyze her own thinking and make the correct a href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/ news/index_c.asp" > judgment and supplement /a, but the weak leader with a lack of assertion may be weaker in this respect.

What do we do then? That requires us to do more homework when dealing with vulnerable leaders.

What do we mean by that? We should take part in the decision-making research and thinking work instead of the leader, and then take these complete arguments, arguments, argumentation processes and conclusions to analyze and go to the leaders to suggest or report the work. As we have replaced the leaders' thinking and show all the contents and processes in front of him, then he can be able to make correct judgments and decisions as a normal normal person.

The advantages of doing this are three aspects: on the one hand, you have improved your ability, because you have already done a part of the work that leaders should do. In the past, you have been getting closer and closer to the requirements of leadership. On the other hand, it is easy for you to convince leaders to do things. The leaders who have no ideas have also become decisive decisions, and your leaders have made quick decisions. Your work performance has also improved along with your work performance. The third aspect is that the leader will find that your subordinates are very conscientious, very competent and cooperate with you. He is very happy. He will be able to take the lead in promoting you if he gets the chance.

< /p >

< p > < strong > four, the fourth rule of dealing with disadvantaged leaders is never to judge the shortcomings of leaders in public.

< /strong > this is very important for a mature manager, but there is not a lot of people to do and can do, which requires a very high degree of personal accomplishment.

Many immature managers especially love to judge or even laugh at their leaders' shortcomings in public. The purpose is to publicize leadership rather than do it themselves, and try to reduce the prestige of leadership through this way of publicity, and replace it in the future.

In all my management experience, such subordinates often have, but these people forget another fact: on the one hand, he himself is too clever to go anywhere. He even fails to synthesize his leadership. On the other hand, his very disgusting act has seriously damaged his own image. Many colleagues will see his jokes or feel bad about him. Would anyone like a self conceited, disrespectful, disrespectful leader in the future to be his own leader?

How can such a person be qualified to compete for leadership positions? The more intelligent people treat their shortcomings in this way: in public, they always turn a blind eye to the weak leaders, and always praise the advantages of other aspects of leaders. For example, soft ears are very open from the front, and are very good at adopting good words, which is a good advantage compared with many opinionated leaders.

In short, we can see more about the advantages of leaders, but through several ways mentioned above, we silently help leaders to make up for their shortcomings and credit their merits to leaders.

Such a wise manager will naturally receive the respect of his colleagues and the appreciation of his leadership. Wherever he is, there is no doubt that his future is beyond doubt.

This rule is what Chinese ancient people often say is "evil and good". This is not only the way to treat colleagues, but also to leaders.

Those who always pick on colleagues and leaders are a black sheep. They will never be accepted by the team. Their career prospects are very bleak.

< /p >

< p > finally, it is worth mentioning that management in real life is often not idealized, but on the contrary, in most cases, it is not idealized. Leadership is also the same. Theoretically, leaders must be the best in all aspects, but in fact, there are many leading comrades, such as those in this case, which have relatively large defects and even very serious defects.

Are these leaders unable to accomplish anything?

This is related to his leadership art.

Similarly, do we have such a leader on top of it and can't do anything? No, it is not.

Enterprise management is teamwork. The key is to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of our leaders and our own and < a href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > team /a. We should adjust the working mode and operation mix according to the different characteristics of each person, and ultimately achieve the business goals that the enterprises want to achieve.

I collate a management theory called "non ideal team" last year, which is that there is no ideal management team in the real world, but only an unsatisfactory management team. The responsibility of management is to lead such an unsatisfactory management team, and also achieve the desired goal that the company wants to achieve.

The great value and role of managers are reflected in this.

< /p >