home Success stories Sales Manager Awards. Calculation of KPI in Excel examples and formulas

Sales Manager Awards. Calculation of KPI in Excel examples and formulas

Efficiency, like leadership, requires doing certain and quite simple things. It consists of a small amount practitioner These behavioral habits are not "innate". IX

I haven't met a single "natural" leader who was born effective. All effective leaders must learn to be effective. They all practiced efficiency until it became their habit. IX

Efficiency can be mastered, and it must be mastered. IX

Without efficiency, there is no "productivity": no matter how much intelligence and knowledge is involved in the work, no matter how many hours it takes. X

8 Principles of Effective Leaders

An effective manager does not have to be a leader in the sense that it is commonly understood. XI

What has made all [effective leaders] effective is following the same principles:

They wondered, "What should be done?"
They asked themselves, "What's good for the company?"
They made plans.
They took responsibility for decisions.
They took responsibility for communications.
They focused on opportunities, not problems.
They had productive sessions/meetings.
They thought and said "we" instead of "I".

The first two practices gave them the necessary knowledge. The next four helped them turn knowledge into effective action. The last two ensured that the entire organization felt responsible and accountable. XI

Knowledge

The first principle is to ask what needs to be done. Note that the question is not "What do I want to do?". Asking yourself what needs to be done and taking it seriously is critical to successful management. Without this question, even the most talented leader will become ineffective. XII

I have never seen a leader who was efficient and worked on two tasks at the same time. ERs [Effective Leaders] focus on only one task. XII

After asking “What needs to be done?”, ERs set priorities and stick to them. For the CEO, redefining the mission of the company could be a priority. XII

After completing the initial top task, the ER re-prioritizes rather than moving on to task #2 on the original list. XIII

Every time ER asks himself "What should be done now? And every time he sets new priorities. XIII

ER tends to focus on tasks that it can perform particularly well. He concentrates on it and delegates the rest. XIII

The second principle of ER - just as important as the first - is to ask, "Is this good for the company?" They don't ask if it's good for owners, shareholders, employees, or executives. They take this into account, but they also understand that a decision that is not useful for the company will not be useful for shareholders either. XIII

Plan

Leaders are people of action; they act. For leaders, knowledge is useless until it is translated into execution. XIV

First, leaders determine desired results asking, “What contribution should the company expect from me over the next 2 years? What results will I put in my efforts? What are the deadlines? Then he considers all options: are they ethical, legal; Are they aligned with the mission, values, and policies of the company? Yes answers do not guarantee effectiveness, but [should be asked]. XIV

An action plan is a statement of intent, not a commitment. This shouldn't be a straitjacket. It must be constantly reviewed, because every success creates new opportunities. Just like every failure. XV

In addition, the action plan should create a system for checking results, not expectations. XV

XVI The decision is not made until the people know:

The name of the person responsible for implementing the decision.
Deadline.
The names of the people affected by the decision and what they need to know in order to validate the decision.
Names of people to be notified of the decision, even if they are not affected by the decision.

Opportunities

Good leaders focus on opportunities, not problems. You have to be concerned about solving problems, you don't have to avoid them. But problem solving, however necessary, does not produce results. This prevents losses. Opportunity research brings results. XVIII

Leaders look for opportunities in these situations: XIX

An unexpected success or failure in their company, competitor or in their market.
The gap between what is and what can be on the market, in a process, service, product.
Innovation in a process, product, or service within a company or in the marketplace.
Changes in industry or market structure.
Demography.
Changes in the way customers think, their values, perceptions, moods.
New knowledge or technology.

ERs make sure that problem solving does not overshadow opportunity exploration. In most companies, the first page of an administrative report contains a list of key issues. XIX

Every 6 months, top management must compile a list best opportunities, and a list of the best employees. ER puts the best in the position of exploring opportunities, not solving problems. In Japan it is the main task personnel department. XIX

Put the best people in the right positions is critical. XVII

Mastering Efficiency

Efficiency can be learned, but it cannot be taught. Efficiency is not a subject, but self-discipline. 166

The first step to efficiency is timing. Analyzing and removing time wasters requires action: changing your habits, relationships, and concerns. 167

The second step is to focus on getting results. Not on productivity and hours of work, but on achieving results. 167

You need to learn to focus and prioritize instead of trying to do a little bit of everything. 171

Efficiency must be mastered. 174

Peter Drucker's most famous book deals with the effectiveness of knowledge workers who acquire modern organization managerial status, if by virtue of its official position or knowledge they are responsible for the work that directly affects the ability of the organization to function and achieve results. To become an effective leader, it is not enough to be smart and work hard. To be effective, no special skills, talents or inclinations are required.

To work effectively, the manager needs to follow certain - and quite simple - rules described and commented on in this book. Today, effective leaders are quickly turning into the most important resource of society, and efficiency in a leadership position is becoming an urgent need for any person aimed at success, self-realization and achievement - both those who are just starting to work, and those who have already gone a certain way up the ladder. career ladder.

book characteristics

Date of writing: 1967
Name: Effective leader

Volume: 240 pages
ISBN: 978-5-91657-428-9
Translator: Olga Chernyavskaya
Copyright holder: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber

Foreword to The Effective Leader by Peter Drucker

I am happy that my book is being published again. Since its first publication in 1966, it has become very popular with a wide range of readers around the world and has been translated into more than two dozen languages. This book is highly recommended reading for employees of many international companies, big and small - both for those who have just taken their first leadership position in their lives, and for those who have received a promotion. The need to learn effective leadership is always relevant. The effectiveness of a leader is not due to the "talent" and certainly not the "brilliant abilities" of a person. An effective leader uses practical methods that can and should be learned. In our increasingly diverse society, it is becoming more and more difficult to work effectively as a manager, and this applies not only to business, but literally all organizations. Efficient work is equally necessary for the self-realization of the individual and effective work organizations.

This book is both a concise plan for improving the performance of the head of the organization, and practical guide on self management in the name of achieving high results - both within the organization and outside them. This is the best introductory course in management theory and organization theory for those who are not related to management - students of non-core universities and faculties and specialists from other fields of activity.

The book is the result of the author's twenty years of experience in management consulting, and it all began with the development of a program for senior executives in the administration of President Eisenhower. The book has long been on the must-read list for employees of many business organizations and all managers who have received a new appointment, regardless of their level and experience. It is also highly recommended for everyone to read. administrative workers a number of the largest universities in the world, for example, heads of departments and deans. The same can be said about the heads of hospitals. The book has proven to be of great benefit to more than a million people who have established charitable or other non-profit foundations and organizations in the United States over the past thirty years. Everyone knows that every developed society today has become society of organizations, and the success (and even survival) of any organization, regardless of its functions, depends on performance of its leaders.

Management books usually talk about managing people. The theme of this book is self-management in order to increase the efficiency of one's activities. Whether one person is able to control other people has not yet been proven by anyone. But you can always manage yourself. Managers who do not know how to manage themselves to improve the efficiency of their activities will not be able to effectively manage colleagues and subordinates. Management is largely carried out by personal example. And leaders who don't know how to effectively organize their work and work environment are setting a bad example.

To work effectively, intelligence, diligence and erudition are not enough. Efficiency is a separate category. However, it does not require special skills, talents, inclinations, or training to be effective. To get results, the manager needs fulfill certain - and quite simple - rules. This small set of rules is described and commented on in my book. These are by no means "innate" qualities, absorbed with mother's milk. Having worked for forty-five years as a consultant to a huge number of leaders in a variety of organizations - large and small enterprises, government agencies, labor unions, hospitals, universities, public services in America, Europe, Latin America and Japan - I have not met a single "natural" leader, who would be born with the ability to work effectively. Everyone who gets high scores today studied hard and then practiced the necessary skills for a long time until they became a habit. But everyone who has worked on themselves to become strong, successful leaders has succeeded. Efficiency is not only possible - it need learn.

Until recently, there was no reason to focus on the performance of managers and worry about its low performance for many of them. However, most people now, especially those with good education, work most of their lives in organizations of one type or another. In all developed countries society has become a society of organizations. Now the effectiveness of the individual's work increasingly depends on his ability to work effectively in an organization, in a leadership position. And the effective functioning of modern society - and even its chances of survival - increasingly depends on the efficiency of the people who manage and occupy it. leadership positions. Effective leaders are quickly turning into the most important resource of society, and efficiency in a leadership position is becoming an urgent need for any person aimed at success, self-realization and achievement - both young, just starting to work, and someone who has already gone a certain way up the career ladder.

Effective leader - Peter Drucker (download)

(introductory fragment of the book)

Current page: 1 (total book has 15 pages) [accessible reading excerpt: 4 pages]

Peter Drucker

Effective leader

...

All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission copyright owners.

Legal support of the publishing house is provided by the law firm "Vegas-Lex"

© Peter Drucker, 1967, 1985, 1996, 2002, 2006

© O. Chernyavskaya, translation into Russian, 2012

© Edition in Russian. Eksmo Publishing LLC, 2012

© Design. OOO "Mann, Ivanov and Ferber", 2012

This book is well complemented by:

Drucker for every day

Peter Drucker, Joseph Macchiarello

Management. Challenges XXI century

Peter Drucker

Steve Jobs. Leadership Lessons

Jay Elliot, William Simon

Warren Buffett

I am happy that my book is being published again. Since its first publication in 1966, it has become very popular with a wide range of readers around the world and has been translated into more than two dozen languages. This book is highly recommended reading for employees of many international companies, large and small, both those who have just taken their first leadership position in their life, and those who have been promoted. The need to learn effective leadership is always relevant. The effectiveness of a leader is not due to the "talent" and certainly not the "brilliant abilities" of a person. An effective leader uses practical methods that can and should be learned. In our increasingly diverse society, it is becoming more and more difficult to work effectively as a manager, and this applies not only to business, but literally all organizations. Efficient work is equally necessary for the self-realization of the individual and the effective operation of the organization.

This book is both a concise plan for improving the performance of the head of the organization, and a practical guide to self management in the name of achieving high results - both within the organization and outside them. This is the best introductory course in management theory and organization theory for those who are not related to management - students of non-core universities and faculties and specialists from other fields of activity.

The book is the result of the author's twenty years of experience in management consulting, and it all began with the development of a program for senior executives in the administration of President Eisenhower. The book has long been on the must-read list for employees of many business organizations and all managers who have received a new appointment, regardless of their level and experience. It is also highly recommended reading for all administrative staff at some of the world's largest universities, such as department heads and deans. The same can be said about the heads of hospitals. The book has proven to be of great benefit to more than a million people who have established charitable or other non-profit foundations and organizations in the United States over the past thirty years. Everyone knows that every developed society today has become society of organizations, and the success (and even survival) of any organization, regardless of its functions, depends on performance of its leaders.

...

Peter Drucker

Foreword

Management books usually talk about managing people. The theme of this book is self-management in order to increase the effectiveness of your activities. Whether one person is able to control other people has not yet been proven by anyone. But you can always manage yourself. Managers who do not know how to manage themselves to improve the efficiency of their activities will not be able to effectively manage colleagues and subordinates. Management is largely carried out by personal example. And leaders who don't know how to effectively organize their work and work environment are setting a bad example.

Executives are paid for their performance, whether they are managers who are responsible for both their job responsibilities and the work of others in the organization, or they are independent professionals and are solely responsible for their contribution to the success of the company. Without efficiency, it is impossible to achieve high performance indicators, no matter how much knowledge you put into your work, how much time you spend on it, how much effort you put in. So far, however, very little attention has been paid to the effectiveness of managers, and this, in general, is not surprising. Organizations—whether they be commercial enterprises, large government agencies, labor unions, large hospitals, or universities—are relatively recent. A hundred years ago, few people dealt with large organizations - except that they went to the local post office to mail a letter. And the effectiveness of the work of a leader is the effectiveness of a person in an organization. Until recently, there was no reason to focus on the performance of managers and worry about its low performance for many of them. However, most people now, especially those with good education, work most of their lives in organizations of one type or another. In all developed countries society has become a society of organizations. Now the effectiveness of the individual's work increasingly depends on his ability to work effectively in an organization, in a leadership position. And the effective functioning of modern society - and even its chances of survival - increasingly depends on the effectiveness of the people who manage it and occupy leadership positions. Effective leaders are quickly turning into the most important resource of society, and efficiency in a leadership position is becoming an urgent need for any person aimed at success, self-realization and achievement - both young, just starting to work, and someone who has already gone a certain way up the career ladder.

Efficiency can be learned

To work effectively is the main task of the leader. In whatever field of activity the leader works - in business or in a hospital, in a government agency or in trade union committee, in a university or in an army unit, he is primarily required correct execution of tasks, or manifestation of efficiency. Simply put, he is expected to work effectively.

Nevertheless, sometimes leadership positions are occupied by employees who do not have high efficiency. Developed intelligence among leaders is a very common quality. Often there is a rich imagination. The level of erudition is usually also very high. However, there is no direct connection between these qualities and the effectiveness of the manager as an employee. Mentally brilliant people are often surprisingly inefficient workers; they sometimes do not understand that with the help of intellect alone it is impossible to achieve significant success in work. And they do not realize that a developed mind will contribute to efficiency only under the condition of purposeful and hard work. And vice versa, in every organization there are very effective employees, true hard workers. While others are frantically rushing about, imitating violent activity, which is even very smart people sometimes mistaken for a "creative approach", such a hard worker, seemingly slowly rearranging his legs, reaches the goal first, like a turtle from an old fable.

Mind, imagination and knowledge are important resources, but only in combination with efficiency they will give results. By themselves, they only set the bar for possible achievements.

Why effective leaders are needed

It would seem that this is obvious. But why, in this case, now, when almost all aspects of the leader's activity are comprehensively covered in many books and articles, so little attention is paid to the effectiveness of his work?

One of the reasons for this lack of attention to the problem is that efficiency is a special technology used in the organization by knowledge workers. Until recently, there were very few such people in organizations.

From an employee physical labor what is required is efficiency, productivity, or rather the ability to get the job done right rather than getting it done right. The activities of such an employee can always be assessed by the quantity and quality of products that can be easily identified and accounted for, such as shoes. Over the past hundred years, we have learned how to measure productivity and evaluate the quality of physical labor, thanks to which we have been able to multiply the productivity of an individual worker many times over.

Previously, in all organizations, the bulk were manual workers - for example, production workers in workshops or soldiers at the front. Need in efficient workers was small: the entire management process was concentrated in the hands of a few "chiefs" who gave orders to subordinates. These leaders constituted such an insignificant fraction of the working population that their effectiveness was not even questioned. We could depend on "natural leaders" - few in any field human activity, - who seemed to be born with the knowledge of what others had to study hard and for a long time.

...

This is true not only in relation to business and the army. Today it seems incredible to us that more than a hundred years ago, during the Civil War, the American "government" consisted of only a handful of functionaries. Under President Lincoln, there were less than fifty people under the Secretary of War, most of them not "managers" and not politicians, but telegraph employees. The entire US government apparatus of the time of Theodore Roosevelt, numbering about 1900 employees, could be accommodated with all conveniences in one of the buildings on the main street of Washington.

AT medical institutions the beginning of the century there were no “health professionals”: radiologists and laboratory assistants, nutritionists and therapists, workers social sphere and other specialists, who today account for two hundred and fifty people for every hundred patients. With the exception of nurses, only cleaners, cooks and maids worked there. The doctor was the only knowledge worker and was usually assisted by one nurse.

In other words, until recently, the main problem of organizations was the productivity of manual workers who did what they were told. There were few knowledge workers in the organizations.

Knowledge workers in general constituted only a few most all employees in a given organization. Most of them were professionals (that is, their work required special skills), worked in isolation and, at best, had clerks for clerical work as assistants. Their performance or lack of performance concerned only them and affected only them.

Today, the dominant position is occupied by large organizations based on intellectual work. Modern society is a society of large organized institutions. In all such institutions, including the army, the center of gravity has shifted towards the knowledge worker, and this person puts into work what is in his head, and not muscle strength or manual dexterity. growing specific gravity workers who were specially trained to use their theoretical knowledge and concepts rather than physical strength. The effectiveness of their work is measured by their contribution to the success of the organization.

Today, efficiency can no longer be taken for granted. These days it is simply unacceptable to neglect it.

The system of measurements and tests that we have developed for the assessment of physical labor - from the organization of production to quality control - is not applicable to the assessment of mental labor. There is nothing more unattractive and less productive than the design and engineering department, famous for the fast and high-quality production of excellent drawings of useless products. Work on necessary products - that's what makes mental work effective. It cannot be assessed using the criteria derived for physical labor.

The knowledge worker does not need petty tutelage. He only needs help. But he must direct himself, and direct him in the direction of effectiveness and contribution to success, that is, in the direction of efficiency.

...

Some time ago, the following cartoon was placed in the New Yorker magazine: an office with a sign on the door “Company Ajax. Chas Smith, Commercial Director. Soap sale. The walls of the office are bare, except for a large poster that reads: "Think." A man sits in an armchair and, throwing his legs up on the table, blows rings of smoke into the ceiling. Two older men walk by, and one of them says to the other, "How do we know what Smith thinks about soap right now?"

Indeed, one can never be sure what a knowledge worker is thinking about at any given moment. But thinking is his specific job; this is what he does.

The motivation of a knowledge worker depends on the effectiveness of his work, on the ability to achieve goals. If his work is devoid of efficiency, then the desire to work and, accordingly, the contribution to the success of the organization will soon decrease and he will turn into an ordinary official who is serving his eight hours at work.

The knowledge worker does not produce anything that could be effective in itself. It does not produce a material product: shoes, machine parts, etc. It produces knowledge, ideas, information. By themselves, these "products" are useless. Another person with a different set of knowledge needs to take his work as input and turn it into final product, put into real shape. The most brilliant idea, if not put into practice, will remain meaningless and useless. Thus, an employee engaged in intellectual, creative activity, must do something that a manual worker does not need to do. And he needs to make sure that his work is effective. He cannot rely on the utility of his product, like a man who makes a pair of shoes.

A well-prepared, educated, thoughtful worker is one of the main "factors of production" due to which highly developed societies and economies modern world– The United States of America, Western Europe, Japan, and increasingly the countries of the former Soviet Union remain or become competitive.

...

This is especially true for the US. The only resource that gives America an edge over its competitors is education. The American education system is far from ideal, but its level is much higher than in the societies of poor countries. Education can be considered the most expensive investment we know of. Social costs associated with doctor training natural sciences, range from 100 to 200 thousand dollars. Even a “fresh” college graduate with no professional experience is an investment of at least $50,000. Only a very wealthy society can afford this.

That is why education is the very area in which the richest country in the world, the United States of America, has an undeniable advantage - subject to high productivity of mental labor. The productivity of a representative of this type of work is expressed in his ability to do what needs to be done and do it right. That's what is called efficiency.

Who is a leader

Any knowledge worker in a modern organization is a manager if, by virtue of their position or knowledge, they are responsible for contributing to work that directly affects the organization's ability to function and achieve results - for example, the ability of an enterprise to bring to market New Product and win the majority of this or that market or the ability of the hospital to provide decent care for its patients, etc. The manager - a man or a woman - has a duty to make decisions; he can't just follow other people's orders. He needs to take responsibility for his contribution to the organization. It is believed that because of his knowledge, he is more likely to make the right decision than any other worker. His place may be taken; he may be demoted or fired. But as long as he works, he is responsible for the goals, standards and contribution to the work of the organization.

Most managers are leaders, although not all. In modern society, those who are not related to management become leaders. Within a few recent years it became clear that in responsible positions related to decision-making and the exercise of power, modern institutions cannot do without as without managers so and without"independent professionals". This fact can be illustrated by a newspaper interview with a young American infantry captain who fought in the Vietnamese jungle.

...

To the question of a journalist: “How do you manage to maintain control over your people in extreme situations?”, The young captain replied: “I alone bear all the responsibility here. If my guys don't know what to do when faced with the enemy in the jungle, I won't be able to help them because I'll be too far away. My job is to make sure they know how to act. And their choice will depend on the situation, which at that moment only they can assess. I bear the responsibility, but the decision is made by people on the ground.”

Thus, it turns out that in a guerrilla war, each person is a leader.

However, many managers are not leaders. In other words, the impact on performance in an organization of a large number of officials with a huge staff of subordinates is small. This category includes, for example, most of the heads of workshops at the plant. In a literal sense, they are just overseers. They are considered managers only because they manage the work of others. But they are not responsible and do not have the authority to determine the direction, content and quality of the work or the methods of its implementation. To a large extent, their work can be measured and assessed in terms of productivity and quality, that is, categories that are designed to measure and evaluate the performance of a manual worker.

The performance by a knowledge worker of the functions of a leader does not depend on whether he leads someone or not. Thus, a person responsible for conducting market research may have two hundred people subordinate to him, while the entire staff of his colleague from a competing firm will consist of two people: himself and a secretary. The specific contribution of managers to the success of the organization practically does not depend on the number of subordinates. This is just an administrative detail. Of course, two hundred people will do much more work than one or two, but this does not mean at all that their work will be more efficient and productive.

Intellectual labor is not quantifiable. It cannot be measured by the costs incurred. The effectiveness of the activity is determined by its results, and neither the number of employees nor the amount of managerial work affects the results.

It can be assumed that the more people are engaged in market research, the sooner the results of their work will be characterized by such qualities as the depth of penetration into the studied problems, a creative approach to work, etc., which will ultimately lead to the development and further prosperity of the company. In this case, even more than two hundred people should have been hired. But perhaps the leader of a large group of researchers will be literally overwhelmed with problems related to the activities of two hundred or more people. “Managing” them will take so much time that he will not have the strength to actually study the market and make responsible decisions. He is busy checking the figures, and it would not occur to him to ask: “What is generally meant by our market? As a result, he may not notice important changes in the market, which over time will lead to the collapse of his company.

An independent market researcher can also be productive and unproductive. So, for example, it can serve as a source of knowledge and a generator of ideas that contribute to the success of the company, or it can be exchanged for solving secondary issues that many theorists take for research work. Therefore, he will not be able to follow the events taking place around him, and even more so to analyze them.

In all knowledge-based organizations, there are people who do not lead anyone, but are considered leaders. It must be admitted that situations, as in the Vietnamese jungle mentioned above, when any member of the group at any moment must be able to make a vital decision that affects the fate of the entire group, do not often arise. However, a chemist in a research lab who chooses to do research one way or the other ends up shaping the future of his company. He may be the director of a research laboratory. Or maybe - and often this is exactly what happens - an ordinary scientist without any managerial authority, sometimes even a completely inexperienced worker. Similarly, the decision about what counts as "one" product in the ledger can be made by the vice president of the company. But it can be accepted by a junior accountant. And this is true for all areas of activity of a modern large organization.

I refer to managers as those knowledge workers, managers or independent professionals who, by virtue of their position or knowledge, are obliged in the course of their activities to make decisions that have a significant impact on the outcome of the entire organization. But by no means should it be assumed that most of them are knowledge workers. As in all other areas, both routine and unskilled labor take place in intellectual activity. But there are more managers in the total number of knowledge workers than is reflected in the organizational charts of many organizations.

It's no secret these days that independent professionals are just as important to the success of an organization as knowledgeable managers. But few people realize how many people today, even in the most ordinary organization - a private firm or a government agency, a research laboratory or a hospital - are forced to make decisions that have serious and sometimes irreversible consequences. After all, the authority of knowledge is just as legitimate as the authority of official position. Moreover, these solutions have the same the weight as well as decisions made by top management. (This main point is pointed out by Mr. Kappel in his report.)

As you know, a manager of even the lowest rank is capable of doing the same job as the president of a company or an administrator of a government agency, that is, planning, organizing, summarizing, motivating and evaluating. The circle of his action may be rather narrow, but in it he is the leader.

Thus, everyone who makes decisions does the same job as the president of the company or the administrator. And although the scope of his activities is limited, he will be the leader, even if his position or name is not indicated either in the organizational chart or in the list of internal telephones.

And there is something that unites executives at any level: they must all be effective.

Many of the examples used in this book come from the life and work of directors, that is, those responsible for the effective management of organizations, including industrial enterprises, government agencies, hospitals, etc. The main reason for this is the availability of information about top managers. In addition, large things are always easier to notice and analyze than small ones.

But this book is not about what is or should be done "at the top." It is addressed to all who, as knowledge workers, are responsible for actions and decisions that can contribute to the success of their organization. It is for all those whom I call leaders.

Chapter 1 Efficiency Can Be Learned

The manager's job is to be efficient. Whether he is in business or working in a hospital, in a government office or in a trade union committee, a university or an army unit, he is expected to perform tasks correctly, that is, to be effective.

Nevertheless, leadership positions are sometimes occupied by workers who do not have high efficiency, although among them there are many who have a high intellectual level and creative imagination. These people are usually well informed and have great knowledge. However, there is no direct connection between these qualities of a leader and his effectiveness as an employee. Even the most gifted people can be surprisingly inefficient; they sometimes do not understand that thanks to one ability it is impossible to achieve any significant success in work. They do not realize that talent can only contribute to efficiency through purposeful work. Conversely, in every organization there are high-performing employees who do not have special talents. While some frantically rush about, imitating the vigorous activity, which sometimes others take for a "creative spark", others, step by step, slowly move towards the intended goal and reach it first, like the turtle in the famous old fable.

Intelligence, imagination and knowledge are essential qualities, but only in combination with efficiency will they be embodied in results. Taken on their own, they only set the bar for what can be achieved.

WHY ARE EFFICIENT MANAGERS NEEDED?

The answer to this question seems self-evident. But then why is the problem of efficiency given so little attention in our time, when whole mountains of books and articles have been written, it would seem, on all aspects of the activities of management workers?

One of the reasons for the neglect of this problem is that efficiency is a special technology applied by a knowledge worker within an organization. Until recently, there were few such organizations in the world.

Physical labor requires efficiency and productivity. In other words, the manual worker must be able to correctly perform the tasks assigned to him, but their adequacy does not concern him. The activity of a manual worker can always be assessed by the quantity and quality of products that can be easily identified and accounted for, such as shoes. Over the past century, mankind has learned to determine the effectiveness and quality of physical labor. This helped to increase the productivity of an individual worker many times over.

Previously, the manual worker, whether a production worker or a soldier, prevailed in all organizations. The need for effective workers was small: the entire management process was concentrated in the hands of a few administrators, "bosses" who give orders to their subordinates. These leaders constituted such an insignificant fraction of the working-age population that their effectiveness was not questioned. They were those few people whose natural qualities enabled them to see what others could only comprehend with great difficulty.

This state of affairs was typical not only for production and the army. It seems incredible to us today that the American "government" during the Civil War more than a hundred years ago consisted of only a handful of functionaries. Under President Lincoln, there were less than fifty people under the Secretary of War, most of whom were not "managers" and not politicians, but telegraph employees. At the beginning of this century, the entire government apparatus of President Theodore Roosevelt could well be accommodated in one of the modern buildings on the main street in Washington.

Medical institutions at the beginning of the century did not have the “health professionals”—radiologists, laboratory technicians, nutritionists, therapists, social workers, and other specialists—without whom modern hospitals cannot be imagined. Moreover, for every hundred patients, there are currently up to 250 medical workers different profile. The hospital staff consisted of several nurses, cooks, maids and cleaners. The only knowledge worker was the attending physician, who was assisted by a nurse.

In other words, relatively recently, the main problem in any organization was the effectiveness of the manual worker who performed the tasks assigned to him. Knowledge workers were in a clear minority.

Knowledge workers made up only a small part of all those employed in one organization or another. Mostly they worked in positions that required special skills, at best with clerks. Their effectiveness, or lack thereof, affected only themselves.

Currently, institutions based on intellectual work occupy a leading place in the life of society. Modern society is a society of large organized institutions. In each of them, including the army, the dominant role is played by a man of mental labor, relying on his head, and not on the muscles and sleight of hand. The proportion of workers who specially learned to use their theoretical knowledge, rather than physical strength, is growing. Their effectiveness is measured by their contribution to the organizations where they work.

Now efficiency can no longer be taken for granted, and it can no longer be neglected.

The system of measurement and evaluation - from the organization of production and accounting to quality control - used in relation to physical labor is not applicable to intellectual labor. Is it possible to imagine anything less attractive and productive than a design office that creates ingenious technical developments that no one desired products? That is why working on the right product is a measure of the effectiveness of intellectual work. Intellectual, creative activity does not fit any measures applied in relation to physical labor.

The creative worker is alien to petty guardianship. He can only help. At the same time, he must direct himself to the fulfillment of the tasks set, that is, to efficiency.

More recently, the New Yorker magazine featured a cartoon depicting the door of some institution, on which a sign hung: "Smith, Commercial Director, Ayako Soap Sales Company." "I think. "In the office, with his feet on the table, a man was sitting and smoking a cigar. A little further away stood two elderly gentlemen, one of whom asked the other: "How can you be sure that Mr. Smith is thinking about soap? .."

Indeed, you never know what a knowledge worker is thinking. At the same time, thinking is his field of activity, his work.

The motivation of an employee engaged in intellectual activity depends on his efficiency, on his ability to achieve his goals. If his work is devoid of efficiency, then very soon his desire to work and bring concrete benefits disappears and he turns into an official serving his time at work from 9 to 17.

A worker with theoretical knowledge does not produce anything that could be effective in itself. It does not manufacture physically measurable products such as shoes, machine parts, etc. It produces knowledge, ideas, and information. By itself, this "product" is useless. Its practical implementation occurs in the next stage, when someone will use it in order to achieve concrete results. The most brilliant idea, if not put into practice, will remain meaningless. Thus, a worker engaged in intellectual, creative activity must do something that a manual worker does not need to do. He must make the work efficient. Unlike the shoe manufacturer, he does not have to worry about the utility of the results of his activities.

The thinking, creative worker is the very "factor of production" that allows the highly developed areas of the world - the United States, Western Europe, Japan, and increasingly Soviet Union- become and remain competitive.

The most typical example in this respect is the United States. Education is precisely the area in which America is most competitive. There are many flaws in the American education system, but it is nonetheless more powerful and larger than the systems that less wealthy countries can afford. Education can be considered the most expensive CAP investment we know of. The social costs associated with the preparation of a doctor of natural sciences are estimated at between 100,000 and 200,000 dollars. Even a young man who graduated from college and does not have any special professional skills is valued at 50 thousand dollars or more. Only a very wealthy society can afford it.