What Are the Different Methods of Effective Leadership?

Significant changes have taken place in the meaning of leadership today. A single commanding and relying on personal charisma for leadership has not achieved good results. The articles collected in this book include the content of leadership work, authorization, career management, obtaining support, grasping the timing of decision-making and communication skills, etc. It has great lessons for new managers who have just set up their jobs to adapt to leadership positions.

Effective leadership

The first person to implement China's strategy

Vision is more important than governance

In Jim Collins's famous Everlasting Book, the authors point out that those magnificent foundations that can really survive forever have one thing in common: there is an exciting "vision" that can help employees make important decisions.

The vision is the company's planning and description of its long-term development and ultimate goals. Companies or teams that lack the guidance of ideals and visions will cower in the face of risks and challenges. They cannot have a firm and lasting confidence in what they are doing. Set off, make decisive decisions, and respond calmly.

Some people mistakenly believe that the job of enterprise managers is to focus 100% of their energy on the management and control of the organization's structure, operations, and personnel. Although this top-down command, organization, and supervision model can have some effects at some time, it will greatly limit the creativity of employees and enterprises, and will easily make the company lose its goal of progress and make Employees' perception of the company's future is greatly reduced. In contrast, developing a clear, inspiring, and achievable vision for an enterprise is even more important for the long-term development of an enterprise. Small businesses in the stage of growth and development may focus more on survival and operations, but even so, managers cannot ignore the importance of vision for cohesion and direction; For a successful company, whether or not it has a good vision becomes the most important thing for the company to move from excellent to excellent.

Belief is more important than indicators

Leaders of every enterprise should put adherence to the correct convictions and adhere to the values of honesty as the first priority in all work. They cannot only pursue one-sided numerical indicators or achievements, or make all decisions in the short Interests, and abandoned the most basic corporate code of conduct. In contrast, correct beliefs can bring opportunities for sustainable development of enterprises; on the other hand, if all efforts are devoted to the pursuit of short-term indicators, although there is a chance to obtain temporary results, it may cause deviations in the development direction of the enterprise and make the enterprise The momentum for continued development was quickly lost.

Successful companies always adhere to their core values. For example, one of Google's core values is "never be satisfied, strive for the best." Larry Page, one of the founders of Google, pointed out: "The perfect search engine needs to understand the users and address their needs." With regard to search technology, Google continues to achieve long-term development through research, development and innovation, and is committed to becoming a pioneer in this technology field. Despite being a globally recognized and industry-leading search technology company, Google remains committed to its "never-satisfied" belief, constantly surpassing itself, and dedicating to better and better search products for users.

Talent is more important than strategy

In the 21st century, no matter how you render or even exaggerate the importance of talent. The 21st century is the century of talents. The mainstream economic model of the 21st century is a talent-intensive and intelligence-intensive economy. Having outstanding talents can change the face of an enterprise, a product, a market or even an industry. For example, at Google, the company's top programming expert Jeff Dean has invented an advanced method that allows a programmer to complete a project in minutes that previously required a team for several months. He also invented a magical computer language that allows programmers to complete extremely complex computing tasks in the shortest time on tens of thousands of machines at the same time. There is no doubt that such talents have a very special meaning for the company.

For corporate managers in the 21st century, talent is even more important than corporate strategy itself. Because of the outstanding talents, companies can make a difference in the market, and managers can truly have the value that a manager deserves. Without the support of talents, no matter how grand the blueprint or any compelling corporate strategy, it will not be able to be truly implemented and the ultimate success will not be achieved.

Therefore, enterprise managers should regard "people-oriented" as one of their most important missions, spare no effort to discover and discover talents, and attract outstanding talents suitable for the characteristics of the company to themselves. Generally, if a manager cannot devote 10 to 50% of his working time to recruiting talents, then he cannot give his team a lasting motivation, and he is not a qualified manager. Of course, the "recruitment" mentioned here is not limited to direct interviews and hiring behaviors. It also includes meeting more friends in the industry and establishing your own network to find more and better talents.

Good managers value the growth of employees, give talents the greatest development space, and provide sufficient training and learning opportunities for talents. For example, when I started the Microsoft China Research Institute and Google China Engineering Research Institute, a large portion of the people I hired were graduates who had just stepped out of school. These graduates are very intelligent, have good development potential, and are top talents from various Chinese universities. However, they generally lack work experience. So, I adopted the principle of mentoring and training for them: Remember that when Microsoft Research China, every new employee will go through 3 months of training after joining. I use the course I designed for them, one section. Explain a variety of relevant knowledge and experience to them one by one. At Google China Academy of Engineering, the training takes longer: including various courses, three months of training to the headquarters, and even the company is willing to pay tuition for employees to take a master's degree at Stanford University. Of course, the training arranged by the company is not pure course learning, but also requires employees to quickly put into specific project work. In the early days when employees join, good leaders will try to assign new employees to projects that are not particularly urgent, and allow them to make mistakes and gain experience in the project. Through this training that closely combines practice and learning, almost every new employee has made great progress and quickly adapted to the needs of actual work.

It is unfortunate that many companies today still maintain the same way of thinking about talents as they did in the last century. They think that employees are just parts or labor in the "big machine" of the enterprise. After the training, they will "hop" and "go away". This is a very short-sighted view. This practice of not paying attention to employee growth will only allow more employees to choose "hopping" and "leaving people."

As long as you have the talent, companies can practice any grand strategy. Conversely, if there is no talent, even a magnificent plan can only be a piece of paper.

Teams are more important than individuals

In any successful business, the interest of the team is always higher than the individual. Any level of management in an enterprise should put the interests of the entire company first, departmental interests second, and personal interests last.

This principle is very clear to say, but it is not so easy to grasp in practical work. For example, many department managers always habitually prioritize themselves and their teams, and unknowingly ignore the company's overall strategic direction and overall interests. This approach is very wrong, because if the company cannot succeed in the overall strategic direction, any department within the company, any team will not be truly successful, and if the team cannot succeed, no individual in the team will be successful. Maybe even a little bit of success.

Good managers are good at deciding the work goals of themselves and their departments and the priorities of goals according to the priority order of company goals. For example, due to the consideration of departmental interests, perhaps the research and development of a certain product cannot obtain sufficient market benefits in a short period of time, it seems that the departmental manager should decisively give up the investment in product research and development. In terms of market returns alone), it may not be so good. However, if from the perspective of the company as a whole, it is assumed that the product is a key factor to help the company win the potential market in the next two to three years, or the promotion of the product is important to improve the company's corporate image. The investment is in the company's overall interests, and the department's setting of the product's research and development goals and priorities should be in line with the company's overall arrangement.

The interests of the team are higher than the interests of the individual. As a manager, you should also have the courage to make some decisions that are beneficial to the company's overall interests, even if it is a loss to your department or even yourself.

For example, when I was working at Apple, I used to manage a project with very poor results. The project manager of this project is a friend of my boss at the time, and this project is also my boss's most promising project. At the time, I knew exactly how bad the project was, and the project manager for the project was not a good manager, but because my boss valued the project, I never had the courage to deal with it. In addition, I am also worried that if the project team is disbanded, it will actually be a negative to my own work, because I have managed this team for more than a year.

Finally one day, I decided to leave the company after a while. At that time, I felt that the company was good to me for many years. I should be responsible to the company before leaving, and do something that is good for the company, but I have been hesitant for myself. So I decided to lay off the project and the project manager of the project-no big deal, this approach will make my boss unhappy, but it is really good for the company.

When I really lay off this project, to my surprise, the vast majority of employees within the company did not express dissatisfaction, but instead told me how much they approved the decision, and they thought I had courage and courage. The company leaders didn't blame me, instead they thought that I had the courage to admit and correct the mistakes. Even my boss thought it was a right decision.

In other words, when the company's interests are in conflict with departmental interests or personal interests, managers must have the courage to make decisions that are beneficial to the company's interests, but not to gain or lose. If your decision is correct and responsible, you will surely be applauded by company employees and leaders.

In addition, managers should take the initiative to play the role of "coordinator of teamwork". They should not only focus on highlighting themselves or someone's talents, but ignore teamwork.

At work, if you do nt actively cooperate with each other and push each other, I will give you an example of playing basketball: "A team in the company is actually the same as a basketball team on the basketball court. Playing In basketball, the defender cannot leave the whole team alone. Players in different positions need to cooperate closely and support each other in accordance with tactical arrangements in order to win the game. In our work, market personnel need to help the product department to find the proper positioning of the product. To provide potential customer information to the sales department, and the manager will assume the role of coach and develop appropriate tactics for the entire team. Can you imagine that the basketball coaches are only discussing one-on-one with each team member when arranging the tactics? In that case, the defender doesn't know what the forward thinks, the forward doesn't know the assist strategy of the defender, the team doesn't blame it! "

Finally, the company's middle managers must be good at grasping their role positioning, so that they can become a bridge of communication and coordination between the boss and employees, rather than confronting the boss or employees. For example, some managers can easily fall into a misunderstanding of their own roles. They either equate themselves with the "employer", confront their interests with the "employees," or see themselves as ordinary employees, opposed to their bosses. Neither extreme is desirable. In fact, middle managers represent the interests of both the company and employees. They should:

Recognize your middle role, don't blame the company blindly and one-sidedly with your employees, and don't become a high-level supervisor and point at your employees.

Take the overall interests of the company as the first, take the initiative to play the role of coordinator, consider both the needs of the company's development and the personal needs of employees, resolve possible contradictions between the two, and maximize the overall collaboration efficiency of the company .

Once you have made your decision, you have the courage to assume the relevant responsibilities, and don't push the blame on employees, bosses or the company.

Authorization is more important than order

The management of the 21st century needs to give employees more space. Only in this way can the employees' enthusiasm be fully mobilized and their potential can be released to the greatest extent. The 21st century is a flat century. Everyone has enough information and everyone has the right to make decisions and choices. Partial or even partial selection, action, and decision-making power will be given to employees. Such a management method will gradually become the mainstream of business management in the 21st century.

In the 21st century, decentralized management will be closer to the expectations of employees, and it is the smartest management method. Because after the company has gathered a group of sufficiently talented people, if they just use these smart people as gears and let them listen to the leadership and command, it will only cause the following problems:

Employees' job satisfaction is reduced.

Employees feel that they are not valued and that the fun and meaning of work is not obvious.

It is difficult for employees to grow continuously at work.

The individual talents and potential of employees are underutilized.

In order to give employees more space and better explore their potential, many successful companies have launched corresponding measures. For example, Google allows engineers to work on their favorite projects or technical work 20% of the time. Once implemented, this system has achieved unexpected and outstanding results. With 20% of free time, many engineers who have great ideas but do nt have the time to put them into practice can spend 20% of their time, or persuade two or three colleagues to complete a certain outstanding work together within 20% of the time A creative product prototype is then released to colleagues within the company for use. If this product idea is really appealing, it could become Google's next "shock" product or service to the world. In fact, many products that Google is proud of, such as GMail and Google News, were first created by engineers 20% of the time. With 20% of this management model, we found:

The success rate of products completed 20% of the time is high because employees are more engaged.

The 20% management model makes employees realize that the company trusts and empowers them, which creates a very good management atmosphere. In employee surveys, employee satisfaction with the company is always higher than other companies I have worked for.

Many managers are pursuing their own control of power. They are accustomed to their command and always attribute most of their achievements to their own efforts. This "power is in control" and "command-oriented" management method is easy to cause:

The manager is under too much pressure, and employees must ask the leader for everything and wait for the manager's order.

The team depends too much on the manager, and the success of the team depends largely on whether the manager can handle all the issues with little detail-and generally speaking, no leader can know everything, and no leader can always be correct.

The entire team's ability to respond to external changes and its efficiency are greatly reduced, because all decisions and orders need to be made by managers, and employees will only report to leaders habitually when they perceive changes.

Therefore, "authorization" is more important and effective than "command". But how do managers empower them? The most important of these is the unification of power and responsibility. That is, when authorizing employees, they not only define the scope of authority for related work, give employees sufficient information and support, but also define their scope of responsibility, so that authorized employees can independently be responsible and interact with each other while having authority. Be responsible so that there is no management confusion. In other words, authorized employees are obliged to take the initiative to handle their work creatively and creatively, and are responsible for the results of their work. They also have the obligation to actively point out when they see problems with other teams or individuals to help the other party improve .

In order to do a good job of authorization, the goals and framework of the work can be set in advance, but not too restrictive, so as not to affect the performance of employees. In my previous company, there was a technically good vice president who did a poor job of licensing. For example, after setting goals, he was always worried that his subordinates would make mistakes because of inexperience, so he would always go over his manager and go directly to the engineer, and then tell the engineer step by step what to do. Even once, an engineer met the vice president in the bathroom, and the vice president actually meditated in the bathroom for more than 20 minutes. Later, the manager of the vice president couldn't bear it anymore, and truthfully reflected the situation to the president. After several warnings but no improvement, the vice president was fired. From this example, we can know that the job of leadership is to set goals, not to control, manage, direct, and order with little detail.

Equality is more important than authority

In the process of enterprise management, although the division of labor is different, managers and employees should be on an equal footing. Only in this way can a positive and cooperative working atmosphere be created.

The first requirement of equality is to value and encourage employee participation and work with employees to set the team's work goals. The common goal setting mentioned here means that in the process of setting goals, let employees participate as much as possible and allow them to put forward different opinions and suggestions, but ultimately the managers still make choices and decisions.

This practice of encouraging employee participation can make employees more support and investment in the company's affairs, and more trust in managers. Although it does not mean that the opinions of every employee will be adopted, when they are personally involved in the decision-making process, and when their ideas are heard and discussed, then they will have a strong sense of participation and recognition even if the opinions are not finally adopted Feel more responsible because of being respected.

Many years ago, when I took over a department, in order to improve efficiency, I set the team's work goals within a week and held a meeting to announce all my decisions. But I did not expect that the meeting was not going well. Some employees were at a loss, some were listless, and some were very picky about my plan. I suddenly realized: I was too arbitrary and hasty in choosing my own goals. So I said to them: "Obviously, I'm too naive about the future. Now, let's go back and work out the team goals that most people agree on."

I tore up my plan on the spot and then announced the establishment of three staff groups to address the three major issues facing the department. One month later, the three groups presented their reports, and I set the final goal with the three group leaders. This time, all employees gladly accepted the new goal.

It is interesting that the new and old goals are almost identical, except for differences in wording. My assistant complained to me: "We wasted a month and we are back to where we were." But I said to him: "No, I chose my goal by intuition before. Without the support of survey data, I could nt Convince employees; now, after a month of work, everyone has confidence. More importantly, because the old goals have not been participated by employees, even if they are implemented, they will have a hard time devoting themselves. "

The second requirement for equality is that managers must listen to the opinions of employees. As a manager, don't consider yourself superior. Think everything is right. Hear the thoughts and opinions of employees equally. In the face of complex situations, managers must make decisive and correct decisions on the basis of comprehensive and trade-offs.

A leader who is not good at listening cannot get the support and trust of employees. For example, when I was working at Apple, the company once faced operational difficulties and needed to adjust its direction. At that time, the board of directors hired a chief executive officer (CEO) known for his strategic vision. When the CEO first came to the company, he told all employees: "Don't worry, the situation of this company is much better than those companies I rescued from the ghost gate. Give me a hundred days and I will tell you the way out where."

However, in this hundred days, he only designed the company's "strategic plan" with the core team he brought with him, and never listened to the opinions of the majority of employees. One hundred days later, he really launched a new strategic plan. However, the company employees neither understood nor supported the plan, and his own reputation began to decline. Because the employees thought he was capable, but he was arrogant and didn't care. The ideas of the employees, so the employees did not really convince him, and did not have the motivation to implement his strategic plan.

Half a year later, the company's performance continued to decline, and the CEO held a general staff meeting. Instead of finding a reason from himself, he pointed to all employees on the stage and said, "You have let me down. You have not worked hard to implement my plan. In the future, I will never allow you to make similar mistakes." As a result, this time After the conference, he lost the support of most employees and was soon fired by the board. Later, someone commented on him: "He thought he could use wisdom and experience to change everything in the company. After he made a strategic decision, he immediately started to implement it, but did not take the time to seek the support of all employees. In fact, his strategic plan is not without The truth, but his way of doing things is completely wrong-he is not a good leader who understands and understands. "

Equality also means that managers and employees communicate smoothly in an equal environment. For example, in 2000 I was transferred back to Microsoft headquarters as global vice president, managing a department with more than 600 employees. At the time, as a person who had never been in leadership at headquarters, I needed to listen and understand the voices of employees. To achieve this goal, I chose a unique communication method-the "Lunch Meeting" communication method.

I select ten employees a week for lunch with them. During the meal, I learned in detail each person's name, resume, work situation and their suggestions for the department's work. In order to allow every employee to speak freely, I try to avoid having meals with two employees in a group or in an office. In addition, I will ask everyone to say one of the things that excite him and the thing that upset him the most in his work.

When dining, I usually talk to the other person first about my most excited and distressed things and encourage them to speak. Then, I will guide you to discuss the issues that employees in all departments have generally felt distressed or concerned about recently, and work together to find the best solution. After the luncheon, I usually send an email to everyone, summarizing "what have I heard", "which are the problems that I can solve now", "when can I see results" and so on.

Using this method, in a short time, I knew and understood every employee in the department. The most important thing is that I can listen to the opinions of the employees and arrange the work reasonably from the perspective of the employees. Only in this way can the company get up and down and work more smoothly.

Balance is more important than force

Many people mistakenly believe that to be a leader must be high-profile and courageous, just like a general with a lot of energy. In fact, such a leader may be suitable for a 19th century factory, but he is not a good 21st century leader.

In the book "From Excellence to Excellence" by the famous business management scientist Jim Collins, the author discusses and analyzes how a company or a company's leader rises from Good through a large number of case investigations and statistics. To the level of greatness. One of the important conclusions of the book is that the best leaders are not the most aggressive ones, but the "diverse" management that has good emotional intelligence and can achieve an ideal equilibrium at different levels of personality. By.

Collins pointed out that there are many excellent companies and excellent leaders, and many companies can achieve good results in their respective industries. But if companies and individuals are measured by standards of excellence, there are very few companies that can maintain sustained and healthy growth and leaders that can continue to achieve business success. On the basis of success, if a company leader wants to further improve himself, maintain continuous growth of his company, and make his personal ability progress from excellence to excellence, he must work hard to cultivate himself in "humility" and "persistence" And "courage".

Humility makes progress. Many leaders have their own respect in their work. They cannot listen to the rules of others. They cannot tolerate other people's opinions. These leaders who do not know how to be modest and prudent may be able to achieve temporary success, but they cannot make continuous progress in their careers and achieve excellence. .

Perseverance means that we persist in the right direction and maintain our unwavering determination and will. Whether it is a company or an individual, once you have identified the direction of your work, you must work tirelessly under the guidance of that direction. Efforts to give up at work or to do things in the past are not truly successful.

Winners need to have enough courage to face challenges. No career achievement can be achieved easily. If one wants to excel at work, he must face various difficulties and obstacles, and must face up to his career setbacks and failures. Only those who have the courage to face the reality and the courage to meet the challenge can truly achieve the goal of transcending themselves and achieve the state of excellence. As Mark Twain said: "Courage is not a lack of fear, but a resistance and control to it."

In addition, balanced and diversified managers pay special attention to the cultivation of their emotional intelligence. In leadership, emotional intelligence is far more important than IQ. Many people may think that leadership is most important in strategy, operations, technology, etc. In fact, these "hard skills" are important, and "soft skills" with emotional intelligence as the core are more important. Here, we can define "soft skills" centered on "Emotional Intelligence" as an art, which includes the essential components of getting along with others, teamwork, treating others with sincerity, leading by example, empathy, and so on. .

Balanced and diversified managers are good at analyzing complex situations with rational and comprehensive thinking, and flexibly choose management methods for different types of teams or different stages of development of teams. For example, when employees are performing poorly or are new to the company, when the company encounters a major crisis, they can be more involved in management and use commands more; when the company changes direction, or employees are not morale because they do not understand the direction When high, you can share the company's vision with employees; when employees are comfortable with the work, or when they find that department coordination is problematic, they can emphasize and encourage teamwork more; when employees know more, or there is no crisis, they can Let employees make choices through democratic discussions or voting; when employees are highly capable and experts, and employees are actively and autonomously, they can be empowered as much as possible; when employees are motivated but lack the ability and experience, they should try their best Consider the long-term development of employees, arrange inspiring work, and be generous as a "coach" for employees.

Reason is more important than passion

Managers should be good at understanding themselves and be able to consciously and rationally perform introspection, self-control, and self-discipline in their work.

Managers should have a full understanding and understanding of their abilities, soberly know their strengths and weaknesses, and understand what they are good at and what they cannot do. Only with sufficient introspection can we make correct judgments in the face of various complex situations, and gain full trust from others when cooperating with colleagues or subordinates.

In the event of a crisis or setback, managers should be able to exercise full self-control and make prudent choices on the basis of reason and calmness. The self-control mentioned here includes:

In a high-pressure environment, you can control your own reactions, calm yourself and your team, and calmly deal with problems.

Understand your position and influence, and know that you are being followed by others (superiors, subordinates, other departments and even customers) at any time.

Take advantage of opportunities to influence the team through your own words and deeds.

When communicating, managers must understand that your every move is being followed by others. I remember one time an employee complained to me, "Why don't you like my department?" I replied, "No, why do you say that?" He said, "You met yesterday, and you praised all the departments, why? The voice is the quietest when it comes to my department? "In other words, the words and deeds of the leaders will subtly affect or even change employees. If leaders work hard, employees work hard. If leaders care about products, employees care about products.

As a manager of an enterprise, if you do not control yourself in time, the results of things may become embarrassing. I remember having a meeting when I was working at Apple. At that time, an employee was angry with me because his wife and friends were laid off and he was very dissatisfied with the company's policies. He uttered a series of unpleasant words in his face, the vulgarity of his language being extremely rare even among the most reckless Americans.

At the time, my first feeling was anger, because his insult and abuse were very bad. But then I thought: "It is inevitable that people will lose their sanity when their loved ones are hurt, and they will inevitably lose their grace when they are scared by disasters." Then I thought that although his performance was extremely rude, there must be a lot of employees I just do nt dare to express it. In the end, I thought that as the director of this department, I represent the interests of the company and should not affect the progress of normal work because of temporary anger.

So I calmly told him: "This time is a very difficult time for you, for me, and for the company. I understand your mood. When you calm down, if you have any suggestions, please tell me What do you think is the most appropriate approach, we can talk about it carefully. "

Later, the employee apologized to me privately and thanked me for not embarrassing him in front of the entire team. After some time, the employee moved his family to Europe and he and his wife both found suitable jobs. He sends greeting cards to me every year, and often expresses his wish to work in the department I lead.

In addition to self-examination and self-control, managers should also maintain self-discipline at all times. They should lead by example at all times and should not have the style of a privileged class. For example, when Google s hired CEO, Schmidt, just joined the company, all Google employees did nt have their own independent office, but the employees still felt the need to give him a relatively quiet office space, so he arranged a relatively small independence office. One day, an engineer came to Schmidt's office and said, "Everyone else is a shared office. My side is too crowded, so I want to sit here with you." Schmidt was surprised and asked him: "You Did you ask your boss? "The employee asked the boss and said," The boss also thinks I should sit here. "So they shared an office until the company later bought a larger building. Even in the new building, Schmidt specifically called for "my office to be as small as possible" to avoid being misunderstood by the "privileged class."

Sincerity is more important than decent

Sincerity is the common quality of all outstanding managers. Managers should learn to treat people with sincerity, respect employees, and let employees know that you understand and appreciate their work. In order to "face", some leaders maintain their so-called "authority" everywhere, and are unwilling to expose their true side to employees. As everyone knows, this veiled leadership is difficult to get the real trust and support of employees.

Sincerity means that managers are good at using empathy and consider issues from the perspective of others. For example, managers should give more feedback to employees, thank them in front of them, criticize them privately (constructively), and communicate more with employees. This is not to say that you cannot criticize before people. If it is the right thing, it should still be discussed frankly in front of people, but if it is the right thing, don't hurt his self-esteem in public.

For managers, the most important point of empathy is to be considerate and value employees' thoughts, and to make employees feel that you are a leader who cares about them. In my own case, I will not blindly praise my subordinates at work, and I will not give employees a general evaluation of "very good", "good", "awesome", but I will do When the results are achieved, he promptly and specifically points out his contribution to the company and makes his performance public. This way of motivating employees can really win the trust and support of employees, and it can have a huge impact on the cohesion of the enterprise.

Sincerity means that managers need to have full trust in employees, do not point at employees, and do not arbitrarily interfere with employees' behavior. You must be honest with yourself and be honest with others, and strive to earn the trust of colleagues or subordinates. Trust is the foundation of all cooperation and communication. If a team lacks cooperation or efficiency, the most important reason is likely to be a lack of trust among team members.

Once, when I discovered that my team was not honest with each other, I took them to the suburbs and held a two-day meeting. I first explained the importance of trust and frankness, and then I hope that everyone will take turns to talk about their biggest contribution to the team and their biggest shortcomings, and where they want to make up for the shortcomings. In order to open up the deadlock, I first talked frankly about my contributions and shortcomings, and exposed what I consider to be the biggest shortcoming. Then I asked my team to give me their opinions and additions. When everyone saw my sincerity, they had a very good discussion frankly. After the meeting, not only was everyone more willing to open up, but also willing to trust others. We built a very good foundation for team trust.

On the basis of mutual trust, the team also needs constructive conflict. The Chinese traditionally like to avoid conflicts and leave things alone. However, a good team must be honest about the issues. If everyone can do the right thing, the open debate will be more efficient. Only by putting all the information on the table can a team make the best decisions faster and more efficiently. In the process of leading a team, a leader should encourage everyone to openly listen to and accept the correct opinions of others, encourage constructive conflicts and debates, and guide the team to consensus. When consensus cannot be reached, the team is guided to make a wise choice instead of making simple compromises to appease everyone.

In essence, trust is to believe that the starting point of others is good. In a trusting environment, we don't have to hide our true colors, we can open our hearts, openly acknowledge our shortcomings and failures, or declare that we need help. A leader needs to create an environment full of trust. Not only can he face his employees frankly, but he also encourages them to be honest with others.

Sincerity means that managers and employees can communicate directly and in an equal environment. The pace of the 21st century is very fast. If you do not know what you have done wrong, the results will be very serious. In the process of internal communication of the enterprise, if you have to do Tai Chi, guess what others think, and do not communicate directly, the entire company will lose efficiency and eventually fail.

In terms of direct communication, managers must not only lead by example, but also repeatedly inculcate the superiority of direct communication to employees, and use actual actions to encourage employees to express their views directly. For example, I made a claim at Google, hoping that employees can give me real opinions, even if I disagree. I once made a point on the company's blog, but one employee thought it was problematic. He expressed his concerns in a meeting in front of many people. I not only accepted his opinions, but also praised and thanked him on many occasions.

Direct leadership feedback to employees is just as important. When problems occur, managers need to give employees clear feedback in a timely manner. For their employees, managers should speak their minds directly, not through third parties. When the communication with subordinates is not smooth, you should improve your communication methods and use different methods to communicate with subordinates on the basis of trust.

Concluding remarks

Leadership is an integrated art. It not only contains a variety of specific management skills and management methods, but also includes many factors such as forward-looking and planning, communication and coordination, sincerity and balance.

In order to become a manager that meets the requirements of industrial development in the 21st century, and to have the basic qualities of an outstanding manager, we must carefully study, appreciate and practice in different levels such as macro decision-making, management behavior and personal quality 21st Century Leadership.

Of course, the recommendations in this article may not be suitable for consistent implementation in any enterprise. In some enterprises (such as foreign companies and innovative companies), they can be more decentralized and equal. But in other enterprises (such as state-owned enterprises, traditional enterprises) can only be done moderately. However, I sincerely believe that the nine types of leadership mentioned in this article should be properly promoted and used in any business. I believe that these nine kinds of leadership can help leaders improve their potential and help companies improve their corporate culture in the 21st century.