😼 👰 👩‍🚀 Mutual Economy 🔘 👩🏻 ✌🏿

The topic is complex and controversial, I apologize in advance. It's about helping one employee to another in solving problems.

It is impossible to say that we are not helping each other. But this practically does not affect efficiency. We help to solve the problem in principle. Well, then, when the solution to the problem is at stake.

For example, a man sits and dulls. An hour, two, a day, a week. Periodically switches to other tasks, suffers, suffers, but dulls further. Then he doesn’t stand it, asks someone, he gets either a tip, a direction of movement, or a decision.

For factory programmers - the approach is absolutely correct. There, the time spent on solving the problem does not matter. Only tasks like “aaaa server fell” or “hell, income tax is not considered, take it in an hour!” require and, most importantly, receive immediate response from the entire IT department.

But, unfortunately, we have a business that earns according to the banal formula: income minus expense. Like any other business.

Income - how much the client will pay for solving the problem. Consumption - how much we will spend on solving the problem.

Well, then everything is simple. The longer a person sits with a task, the higher the expense. Accordingly, the longer an employee stupid, the less the company will earn.

Someone will say garbage. If the task is for the client 4 hours, then the employee will receive 4 hours, but he’s stupid for at least a week.

But there is such a thing in the world as lost profits. I quote: unrealized opportunities for generating income, profits in connection with the unsuccessful choice of image, method of action.

Simply put, a person could make 40 paid hours per week, but he did 4. Because he was dumb over the task without receiving timely help.

Actually, the word “timely” is the key. Because help has different goals.

I have already mentioned the first goal - to help, so that the task is generally solved. With such a goal, it is perfectly acceptable to let down.

The second goal is not to help at all, let him figure it out, maybe he can learn something. With such a goal, helping is harmful. True, it’s hard to earn money. Especially if the employee studies, studies, and then dumps. He didn’t bring money, he learned to work, and will help a new employer.

The third goal is to help solve the problem faster. The faster the problem was solved, the more money we earned.

There are two points, or points of growth. The first is conversion. The less time an employee spent on solving a problem, the more we earned.

The second is the deadline. If the dull one is helped in a timely manner, then he will solve the problem quickly, and the client will get the result faster. Well, or, at least on the agreed date. If the dull one is not helped, then he will advance the task for a week, a month, or even longer.

The speed of solving the problem is important to the client, but does not give a direct instant effect. However, it is possible that the client will like it if his tasks are solved quickly. And he will increase their number.

Some customers have a single task rule. It is not advertised, but is meant. I, too, once was a customer, imagine, and what it is about.

The rule is simple: give one problem, and do not give a second until the first is solved. Tasks are arranged in a chain, a queue, like red blood cells in capillaries, and crawl through only one at a time. Accordingly, the faster one task is solved, the faster the second will appear in the work.

Actually, further it is clear. Help is a tool to achieve a specific goal. Depending on the purpose, assistance must either not be provided at all, or provided just before the deadline, or provided in a timely manner.

You don’t have it at all - the employee is either growing or drowning.

You find yourself in the deadline - the employee is growing poorly, earnings are low, the deadlines for solving problems are high.

You render in a timely manner - we earn more money, the deadlines for solving problems are short, the client is satisfied and brings us the rest of the money. True, there is a suspicion that employees do not grow if they are constantly helped.

But this is not so. Here the key is the cause of dullness, which requires help. On what shut up, went in cycles. The most common is context.

Typically, an employee is dumb on context. He does not understand where to start. He doesn’t know what is surrounded by the problem in general, whether it be a framework or a subject area.

Roughly speaking, he is looking for something, I do not know what. It seems, well, figs with him, he will find, after all, in the end. And remember. Will remember

But not a fig. I also used to think that once finding a solution, I will not forget it. I’ll forget how. Moreover, very quickly. And the value that I found it myself is zero. And for the company - it’s quite specific money that it didn’t receive while I was stupid.

And you need something quite a bit. In fact, poke your finger in the direction of solving the problem. Check this out. Look over there. Try it through this mechanism. You are not looking at all there. Etc.

The key is timeliness. It makes no sense to wait until a person loads a context into his head, understands all the relationships to solve the problem and immediately forget the whole context.

But there are difficulties with the help. First - what for it helps? After all, helping another, you lose your time. Your own effectiveness is decreasing, but at the recipient of aid it is increasing.

I don’t know, to be honest, what to do. That is, I know several options related to changes in the motivation system, but this area is often beyond reach. But in vain.

I know one thing: the total effectiveness of the team, while providing timely assistance, is growing, and very significantly. The one who has helped has lost a little, the tupeyev has gained - more than the one who has helped lost. As a result, the team earned more.

True, the concept of "team" is not common, so it cuts the ear. What kind of team? There is me, there is he, she, they, bosses, managers, clients. Who is the team here?

Again, I don’t know. I only know that the team does and gives more than the team. 10 people, each of whom works for himself, is a team. Add a boss to them - you get a department. We remove the boss, organize mutual assistance and set a common goal - we get a team.

A team will bring more money than a team and a department. Yes, and earn more in the end. And competencies will grow faster thanks to the constant exchange of knowledge. The one who helps is also enriched with knowledge.

The second difficulty is purely algorithmic. For example, I was dumb and I need help. But the one who could help is objectively busy. What to do?

The wrong option is to go further into one. Those. lose a ton of time waiting for help.

The correct option is to do another task, clearly indicating that you need help. When the help is freed, you must be ready to switch immediately, so as not to waste his time waiting.

This is a compromise option that increases conversion - the deadline for solving the problem, it seems, remains the same. But the ratio of the sold result to the spent hours is growing. According to own research, 2-3 times.

Mutual Economy

More articles: