As we’ve discussed in previous posts, to become a major company, we need a shift in perspective.
Global standards might sound intimidating, but they’re not as complex as they seem. It’s not about technology or open policies. The true global standard is ‘keeping money in your pocket is more important than how much you earn.’ Saving money is more critical than making it. It reduces the strain on society’s resources.
This doesn’t mean sales and marketing are unimportant. However, if we (a) don’t understand what’s costing us money, (b) don’t know where our money is going, and (c) our team isn’t actually saving money, then all our efforts in sales, marketing, and R&D are pointless.
We only realize this during economic downturns when we don’t have enough reserves due to excessive spending during good times. It’s easy to spend when money is flowing freely, but when times are tough, we struggle to answer, ‘Where will the money come from to survive?’
In HR, costs are often hidden and long-term. For example:
- Mismatched hiring: Hiring people who are overqualified or underqualified can lead to high turnover and wasted resources.
- Overpaying or underpaying: Both can lead to employee dissatisfaction and turnover.
- Lack of a strong employer brand: This makes it harder to attract and retain top talent.
- Weak company culture: A lack of a clear and defined company culture can lead to high turnover rates.
To address these issues, we need to:
- Better define job roles and expectations.
- Improve our hiring processes.
- Build a stronger employer brand.
- Create a more defined company culture.
By focusing on these areas, we can reduce costs, improve employee retention, and ultimately become a more successful company.
Instead of having a lot of customizable content for each target audience, training costs are one of the biggest expenses in the HR department’s budget if we don’t have people with the ability to express themselves and enough experience to focus on training content that can be immediately applied to the company’s context. Each level has different interests in the content they want.
Instead of doing a very good job of orienting new employees in the first few months of integration,
- Company orientation
- CV thinking skills
- Trial work content description
- Work procedures
- Report forms
- How you understand to achieve the company’s expectations after the trial period We let them swim, leading to confusion between new and old employees, and between new employees and the new environment. Costs: Resignation, low engagement, low integration, low CV effectiveness, and high drama and toxicity due to lack of guidance from managers for new employees.
Instead of teaching mindset, we teach skills or tactics. The problem is that employees won’t do it until they know the “Why” (why do it).
- Motivation for this CV
- Expectations for this CV
- The meaning of this CV
- Steps to implement this CV
- Support person Don’t talk about what, talk about why and how. Cost: Most of the time is spent on missed deadlines and training employees to know one thing but lose half.
Instead of summarizing the successful secrets of departments into written documents, Know-how on effective operations in departments is concentrated in a few people. Cost: When this person leaves, the company becomes dependent.
Instead of holding concise meetings, going straight to the point and specifying who should do what and when. Usually, both the meeting chair and the employees attending the meeting don’t know what the meeting will be about, arrive late, or don’t read the documents in advance. Cost: The cost of many people who are not effectively sitting in an ineffective meeting.
Instead of building a career path and impact for everyone so that everyone has their own goals to strive for, We let them swim aimlessly without knowing who they will be in this company in the future. Cost: When they see a better opportunity, they will leave.
Instead of measuring CV effectiveness and having monthly/quarterly figures to confirm where they are effective in their CVs. We hardly measure anything. Cost: If you don’t measure, you can’t improve, leading to wasted labor productivity.
Wrong promotion due to lack of people. So when a good person comes in, they don’t want to be a soldier for someone who is worse than them, so the boss is hesitant. This should have salary scale evaluation criteria. And measure the requirements for competence to be promoted appropriately. Have data to justify why someone is promoted. Additional costs: Resignation, low engagement, not giving their best, conflict between employees.
Instead of liberating, we impose. Basically, people love to resist, their parents can’t change them, how can we change them? We can only choose people who fit the position we want to recruit to unleash their potential. Cost: Resignation, low engagement.
Instead of developing according to the niche a) expert or b) manager, We promote trusted people who are good at their profession to become managers. And people who are good at resolving conflicts and connecting people, we haven’t spent time developing them. Cost: We will lose a good professional and gain a bad manager. Data: To train a professional manager, the success rate is low.
Instead of recruiting and setting the right management capacity. The company has too many managers -> Few people to implement. The company has too many implementers -> Raw information is returned to the CEO for decision-making, which takes a long time.
Instead of focusing entirely on company benefits, We ignore basic physical factors to attract employees, but pay too much attention to high-level things.
Instead of communicating to employees from the beginning that the bonus is based on business performance, We don’t say it clearly, so every year we have to mortgage our house to pay bonuses to our employees.
Instead of making a commission policy that matches the company’s expense line, We can’t draw a budget, so the higher the reward for the high milestone, the smaller the company’s profit.
Instead of firing employees gently to avoid drama, We haven’t seen the big picture and are fighting with employees. Cost: Waste time focusing on bigger CVs for the company. Be the master of yourself, gently say goodbye to focus on more valuable CVs. When we still distinguish between right and wrong, we are only equal to them. If there are no harmful acts related to the law, simply resolving conflicts with peaceful energy will create a good feeling for both sides. I hope the company develops and you all succeed.
Instead of finding and developing middle managers now, With a certain scale, founders only see them: a) Not dare to decide b) Not dare to touch money c) Dependent on oneself d) Not dare to take responsibility Leading to the company’s growth rate stagnating for many years, while the CEO becomes busier and busier, because CVs are not shared with middle managers who are capable enough to handle them.
Instead of having clear criteria for evaluating employees, most of the time at the Year-End Party, we don’t have a basis, so we often: a) Honor those who don’t try very hard b) We ignore those who really try, because the boss is also busy After the honor, people who don’t try continue not to try. Those who really tried don’t bother trying anymore. Those who really try still try, but their nature is not because of us… Instead of decisively firing unsuitable employees, Because basically people live emotionally, sentimentally. This depends on the context, there is no general answer, but basically we know the cost is increasing but our heart doesn’t allow us to make a painful decision.
Instead of keeping a suitable leadership distance for each level, We are too nice to those who need to be strict and too strict to those who need to be nice.
Instead of having both carrots and sticks, We both caress and sternly -> Confusing the employees we lead. This cost is very high: It affects our mental health. In general, there are too many potential costs.
There are many more, but the post is too long, so let’s stop here for you all to contemplate.