What if the sales staff with excellent performance are not controlled by the company?

A complete staff management system should be established. There is a penalty and a prize. We can deal with the problem from the aspect of employees, instead of blindly pursuing achievements.

You can consider employee performance and the company. First of all, don't think about quitting or anything.

Why not talk to them privately? I think managers should establish a good communication relationship with employees. You should know them in many ways.

Here are some management and employee performance appraisal methods (on the other hand, consider solving problems)

* A kind of "chicken ribs"

Some people say that performance management is the core of human resource management; Some people say that performance management is the most important means for enterprises to win competitive advantage; Others say that performance management is a second venture for HR managers to enhance their status and value, and it is a battle and management revolution initiated by them.

In any case, it is an indisputable fact that performance management has become an effective tool for strategic management of most excellent companies in the world. The research of relevant institutions in the United States shows that the performance of financial companies that formally use the performance management system is obviously better than that of financial companies that do not.

For some time, performance management has also been sought after by domestic enterprises. However, more and more enterprises in China are going through a road from superstition to doubt, and from doubt to disdain.

The introduction of performance management, the implementation effect is not ideal, or give up halfway, or become a mere formality, not only failed to motivate employees, improve performance, and even caused dissatisfaction among employees, undermined the stability of the organization and had a negative impact on the company's performance.

In a survey of "Ten Puzzles of Professional Managers in China", "Performance Appraisal" ranks first. "Performance management is like chicken ribs. It is a pity to eat tasteless and abandon it. " A manager said.

The universally applicable performance management system of foreign enterprises is "acclimatized" as soon as it sets foot on the land of China?

* Philosophy

There is a joke in the industry. An expert attended a seminar with the theme of "Performance Appraisal and Salary Management", and originally planned to discuss the topic of performance management with you. "But there is no way, the organizer insisted that I change the topic to performance appraisal."

There is a cognitive misunderstanding behind the helplessness of experts: performance appraisal equals performance management. Many managers regard the appraisal form filled out at the end of the year as the whole of performance management.

In fact, from the process point of view, performance appraisal is only a link of performance management.

In a more profound sense, performance management is not so much a method or tool as an idea, a philosophy and a management philosophy of "performance-based management and performance-based development".

Quantitative and scientific evaluation is not the ultimate meaning of performance management, but its greater value lies in helping managers form scientific management habits and helping employees improve their work efficiency, thus contributing to the realization of enterprise strategy.

* A process

"Starting from performance, then returning to performance", in many excellent companies, performance management has already been promoted from the auxiliary and transactional tactical level to the strategic level of gaining competitive advantage, and all management is centered around performance management.

Performance management is a kind of management at first, which covers all the functions of management, including planning, organization, leadership, coordination and control. Secondly, it is a cycle: setting performance goals, formulating and implementing performance plans, communicating and coaching performance, implementing performance evaluation, communicating and feeding back performance, and applying performance results.

In this process, it not only emphasizes the realization of performance results, but also emphasizes the process of planning, analysis, evaluation and feedback; It involves not only the performance of employees, but also the performance of enterprises and departments.

We track every link, look for the misunderstanding of enterprise cognition and operation, and try to give solutions.

Historically, there is no fixed model for successful management, only applicable methods. The same is true of performance management, and the most important thing is to find a suitable method.

"Who will evaluate the CEO?"

All the processes need the leadership's hands-on, and need mechanisms and systems to support and guarantee.

Dilemma: Evaluation error

"The performance appraisal of a unit should be carried out from top to bottom." Human resources professionals say so, and so do business owners.

KPI, balanced scorecard and MBO, the management tools of performance appraisal, all emphasize that the appraisal should start from the source of enterprise management, that is, from the strategy of the enterprise.

However, in practice, the performance appraisal of many units is a failure: some senior leaders of enterprises require performance appraisal throughout the company, and everyone should have their own performance appraisal form, while the general manager does not have his own appraisal form. As the direct subordinates of the general manager, the top management of the company often does not have a performance appraisal form that treats employees equally, or it is just a formality and perfunctory.

Once, the author went to the vice president's office of a company and asked him if he had completed the self-evaluation of the performance appraisal form this quarter. As a result, the vice president was absent, and only his secretary was filling out an examination form carefully. He walked over and saw that the name of the vice president was impressively written in the column of the assessed on the performance appraisal form.

Indeed, when the human resources department reports the performance appraisal work to the company's top management, it can always get verbal "strong support" from the top management. These senior leaders really want to improve the performance of the whole company, and they also think that performance appraisal is a very good tool, but their eyes always look down and think that it is the following people who will be assessed.

The feeling of being "tested" is not very cool, so the top management of the enterprise has a subconscious rejection psychology, which is no different from an ordinary employee.

As long as this phenomenon exists in a company, performance appraisal can not be effective, and it is bound to become a mere formality. Because, originally, performance appraisal was a top-down system, but there was a fault in practical application, which broke from above, which would inevitably lead to the collapse of the whole system.

Tactics: the key to "steeple"

When there is an evaluation gap, it is often that the work is not done well at the beginning of the new performance evaluation system.

Managers of enterprises have long developed some management habits and methods, and it should be said that most of them have been proved to be successful. Now that unified management tools are implemented as soon as they start, bosses are definitely not used to it and subconsciously don't want to change it.

After all, this is a question of self-change.

Although it is difficult for people to suddenly make self-changes, it is relatively easy if a team decides to make changes together. Of course, this should be based on the premise that this team really wants to change.

The author once encountered such a thing: the boss of a real estate company has been having problems communicating with his senior team. He is the chairman of every meeting and is used to this kind of management. In fact, his executives have long been dissatisfied with this one-way communication. Some people have made suggestions, but it is difficult to change them. The boss always pulls himself away from his subordinates.

Finally, at the repeated request of the human resources department, the chairman agreed to participate in a two-day outreach training with his management team, and the head of the human resources department specially selected some tasks that must be completed through two-way communication. After two days of training, the chairman seems to be a different person. After returning to the company, he changed his previous communication attitude, and even asked everyone not to call him Mr. Li, but to call him by his first name or Mr. X. Everyone in the team also realized the benefits of communication and the effect of his work was obviously improved.

In fact, how a unit's performance appraisal is carried out is very important for this part of people on the spire.

First of all, this high-level team should unify their understanding of the assessment, and everyone should sit down and communicate in depth, and everyone should express their true thoughts on this matter. No matter whether it is positive or negative, you can express any opinions, and then have in-depth discussions to be truly knowledgeable.

Then, put it into management behavior. Seriously discuss the goals that everyone (including the general manager) thinks they should achieve in a year or a quarter, and write them on paper, that is, form a performance appraisal form.

Our work plan, work measures, work instructions and a series of management behaviors all revolve around our performance appraisal table. The performance appraisal form of our subordinates is the continuation of everyone's appraisal form, and it should also be turned around this form.

In order to truly become a management tool, performance appraisal must first become a management tool for the top management team.

Over time, performance appraisal has become an inseparable part of enterprise management, and there will be no mistakes.

"Lack of quantitative culture"

If you cannot measure it, you cannot manage it.

Dilemma: Everyone thinks it's too much trouble.

As a management tool, performance appraisal is first and foremost a practical science. However, in the process of enterprise management development in China, there is a lack of a course representing standards, processes and norms and "industrialization", and people can't get used to management methods that require logical and rational behavior such as quantification and scoring.

Just like a chef in China cooks a dish, if the amount of oil, salt, sauce and vinegar is quantified, the fried dish will not taste like that. China culture is not good at quantifying this rational thing in its bones. For a long time, perceptual and vague practices have dominated our behavior first.

The ISO9000 standard of many of our enterprises has become a form, and people are never used to the troublesome and trivial working method of "writing whatever they want, doing what they write, and remembering it".

These will inevitably become a dilemma for Chinese enterprises to implement performance management tools, and everyone subconsciously is unwilling to do it or is not good at it.

The leadership art of enterprise managers in China is mainly reflected in how to do ideological work. They often say "you should do a good job", but seldom think of such very specific and operational suggestions as "you should try to sell a car every day" or "you should visit at least five customers every day".

The author interviewed many HR managers and asked them, "What is the reason for poor performance appraisal?" At that time, the most common sentence they said was-"Everyone thought it was too much trouble!"

I once asked a department manager, "Why doesn't everyone support performance appraisal?" He replied, "It's not that we don't support it. It will take us a day to grade our performance appraisal, and we are too busy with our work. Everyone thinks it is really unnecessary to pick up the things on the form. It is better to spend a little time doing something practical. "

Everyone thinks it is a disadvantage to take time out of the already tense work to do performance appraisal. This mentality is very representative in those enterprises that are not conducive to performance appraisal, and it is a big obstacle that affects many enterprises to carry out performance appraisal.

Tip: Make persistence a habit.

To solve this problem, we can proceed from the following aspects:

First of all, we must have a unified understanding.

Although the method of performance appraisal can be simpler and more efficient, this trouble is absolutely inevitable.

The performance appraisal of modern enterprises is completely different from our traditional leadership art management. Since it is a scientific thing, it is necessary to act according to rules and procedures, so that the "trouble" brought by the pursuit of "science" can not be avoided.

If the performance cannot be well described, it cannot be quantified; If it can't be quantified, it can't be well controlled and managed. What performance management needs to do is to formulate standards and quantitatively evaluate and manage the performance of a unit with some procedures, standards and processes.

For an enterprise that implements the performance appraisal management method for the first time, it is actually no less than a change. We must put the concept first and solve the attitude problem first.

There are many ways to unify understanding, such as training. However, in practice, some enterprises have also conducted training before implementing performance appraisal, but it seems that the effect is not great. In fact, the training is not done well. Many enterprises have turned training into one-way indoctrination. The people above talked with relish, but the people under the stage were busy dozing off, even after listening to Tuozai. This kind of training does not make everyone participate wholeheartedly, and it is impossible for everyone to have a scolding. On the contrary, some enterprises do well. On the basis of training, they organize big discussions, or organize knowledge contests, speech contests and prize-winning essays on personnel system reform. It is very important to involve the top managers of enterprises and create a good atmosphere at the beginning of things.

Second, we should regulate our own behavior.

It is not enough to unify our understanding. We should take advantage of the heat and standardize everyone's performance appraisal behavior.

In the process of training, there should be warm-up training to tell everyone what to do, how to do it and when to do it.

For example, we want to tell you that when making plans at the beginning of the year or at the beginning of the quarter, we should set our own performance goals and work out the standards and evaluation methods to achieve them through discussion. Next, we should constantly review the implementation of the target every month, discuss the achievement of the target at the plan summary meeting, and pay attention to collecting relevant information on the achievement of the performance. At the end of the quarter or the end of the year, the relevant personnel should evaluate and score according to the relevant processes, check the conversation feedback, etc.

In short, we should standardize and streamline this work and turn it into daily behavior.

In order to standardize the behavior, people in the human resources department are needed to organize, supervise and inspect first, and they cannot relax. After a long time, it becomes a habit.

Of course, if there is no good persistence, bad habits will be formed from the beginning, and it will be difficult to change them again.

In order to standardize performance appraisal, some enterprises have simply developed an electronic performance appraisal system. This system will automatically send instructions to each employee to fill in the target assessment form and evaluate the score through the computer on a regular basis, and automatically link the evaluation results with the salary and treatment, thus forcibly standardizing everyone's behavior. Over time, it will form a habit and a cultural atmosphere.

Many multinational companies rarely talk about the difficulty in implementing their own performance appraisal, because they have formed habits and atmosphere and have corresponding management methods. When you enter their company, you have to do as they ask.

"Role conflict between human resources and business departments"

Those who are absent should be compensated, those who are offside should be retired, those who are misplaced should be twisted, and those who should not be managed should be let go.

Dilemma: finger pointing.

"Why can't you follow our evaluation plan?" "Why can't you make work arrangements in advance and submit them on time?" "The A+ quota you submitted has exceeded the standard again!" "You always hand over difficult employees to us" ... In the process of introducing performance appraisal in enterprises, we often hear human resources managers complain to business department managers like this.

Of course, the manager of the business department is not to be outdone: "You human resources people don't know our situation at all. It's too dead." "We have to go out to meet customers and deal with your homework. How can we have time? " "We have many excellent employees. Why can't we have more places? " ……

I believe many people have long been used to such a scene.

In enterprises, it is generally understood that human resource management is the business of human resource department, and performance management is a part of human resource management, which is of course done by human resource department. The general manager only gives some instructions on the implementation of performance management, the business manager only does some specific work of filling out the form, and the rest is handed over to the human resources department. If he doesn't do well, he will only criticize the human resources department. In fact, this is a common mistake in role assignment in performance management.

This is mainly because, on the one hand, many enterprises can't treat performance management systematically, can't dissolve performance in the daily management process, and only provide simple and boring performance appraisal forms to department managers. The process of performance management is relatively simple, lacking communication and guidance. Only when it is considered necessary, some forms filling and assessment work are organized.

On the other hand, because it may become the focus of conflicts of interest, department managers just regard performance appraisal as a task. They are tired of performance work, and then asking them to fill out some inexplicable forms will often increase their boredom.

Tip: Find the right location.

So how to position the role of managers at all levels in the enterprise? How to resolve this conflict?

Enterprises that have succeeded in performance management have clearly defined the roles of managers at all levels in performance management: the human resources department is responsible for the effective implementation of performance management, but it is by no means fully responsible. In the implementation of performance management, human resources department mainly plays the role of process/program maker, work form provider and consultant. As for the implementation of the performance plan, it has nothing to do with the human resources department.

The top management of the enterprise bears the main responsibility for the implementation of performance management. All the work of the human resources department was in vain because of the efforts to leave the top. High-level efforts are not as simple as initial mobilization, but should run through the whole process until performance management is fully implemented.

Therefore, those managers who think that performance management is the business of the human resources department should immediately change their ideas, do it themselves, and actively be cheerleaders, encouragers and supporters of the human resources department to help the human resources department carry out this important work.

Of course, in addition to clear responsibilities, to truly solve these conflicts, we need to do the following work:

First, strengthen the publicity of the concept of performance management. First of all, let all employees realize that the only purpose of implementing performance management is to help employees, departments and enterprises improve their performance. Solving problems more timely and effectively is a sincere cooperation between managers and employees. Secondly, let managers at all levels realize that assessment is a link in performance management. In addition to evaluation, performance management needs good planning, guidance and implementation, as well as the application of results.

Second, senior support. A famous enterprise management master said that performance is the holy grail that enterprise management should strive for. From this perspective, performance management should be a major event in enterprise management reform. Therefore, the boss of an enterprise should not hide behind the scenes and should not be disturbed or hindered. Instead, we should take the initiative to stand at the front desk, actively participate in it, and give full leadership and support to the human resources manager.

Third, strengthen skills training for managers at all levels. In some enterprises, department managers don't support performance management, not because they don't realize the importance of this work, but because they don't know how to do it well. Therefore, when enterprises introduce performance management, it is very important to improve the management level of managers at all levels and the ability and skills to deal with various problems in the process of performance management, in addition to improving the scheme.

Fourth, strengthen the assessment. Enterprises that successfully implement performance management have a successful experience, that is, at the initial stage of the introduction of performance management, performance management is regarded as an evaluation index of managers' management ability at all levels, and it is included in the assessment of managers to promote performance management in the form of assessment.

"short-sighted behavior"

Always giving up immediate interests is a tree without roots, and always sacrificing long-term interests is passive water.

Dilemma: mercenary

"Short-sightedness" is a common word used to describe people who are short-sighted and only care about immediate interests.

In today's market that pursues the maximization of interests, these four words have become a true portrayal of the performance management of some enterprises in China.

"Everything depends on money", for those enterprises that take a single financial indicator as the assessment standard, they will not hesitate to kill the goose to get the egg.

For enterprises, the pursuit of profit is understandable. However, only focusing on immediate profits will inevitably lead to short-sightedness and make enterprises lose opportunities for long-term development.

In fact, compared with other goals, profit can only be regarded as a short-term goal. For enterprises, image, reputation and market share are the basis of survival and the premise of generating profits. Achieving these goals is more valuable than maximizing short-term profits.

It should be said that a long-term development goal is clear, but the enterprise that may continue to lose money at present is a promising enterprise. For many enterprises, the short-term profit target can only keep the operators busy with the status quo and lose consideration of the long-term development strategy in the future.

After careful analysis, the author finds that there are three main reasons for these short-term behaviors.

Among them, one of the most prominent reasons is that enterprises lack a clear strategy.

The strategy is to solve the problems such as where to go, how to get to this place, and what is the unique value provided to customers compared with competitors.

Generally, enterprises with clear strategies will consider the coordination of long-term and short-term goals in goal setting. If the business operator is not very clear about the next step, he will not set long-term goals, and his short-term goals cannot reflect the future and cannot be coordinated with the long-term goals.

Another important reason is the negative effect of lifelong system.

The purpose of lifelong system is to overcome the disadvantages of lifelong system. However, many enterprises, especially state-owned enterprises, are frequently mobilized and may even be promoted during their term of office. This makes business operators have the behavior of sacrificing the long-term interests of enterprises for short-term performance.

There is a state-owned enterprise in Beijing. When the market competition began to intensify, the benefits of enterprises fell sharply. In order to stop the downward trend, the company has changed three leaders in a row, but it still doesn't work. What is the reason? According to the author's observation, an important reason for the failure of frequent coaching change lies in the short-term behavior of the incumbent. Every leader is eager to turn around Gan Kun, but they all make a fuss about marketing. Because the company's financial strength is weak, millions of advertising investment is almost pale and ineffective in front of competitors.

Are these leaders incompetent? I'm afraid not all. They may all understand that there are two ways to solve the problem. First, the introduction of strategic investors can not only improve the corporate governance structure, but also build financing channels; The second is to reform the incentive mechanism and optimize the reorganization of the rich.

However, the introduction of private capital is equivalent to the introduction of market mechanism. Will the market mechanism choose to operate this enterprise? The reform of human resources touched the interests of the old workers. Can they give you peace of mind to operate? So it is not hard to imagine who would strongly advocate these two measures. No! The link is invalid.

In addition, the lack of tools to balance long-term and short-term goals is also an important factor that causes short-sightedness of enterprises.

In practice, many business operators have clear strategies and can take a long-term view subjectively. However, in practice, long-term goals and short-term goals can not be well combined, and the lack of operational management tools also makes enterprises unable to really implement strategic planning and eventually become short-sighted.

Tip: learn from each other's strengths.

After analyzing the reasons, it is not difficult to see that the most fundamental thing for enterprises to overcome short-sighted behavior is to have a relatively long-term strategic plan. As for how long, it depends on the industry and competition of the enterprise. The general trend of strategic planning is more and more dynamic and flexible, and the strategic cycle is shorter and shorter.

Regarding the tenure system, we should realize that objectively speaking, the operator needs time to understand and be familiar with this enterprise and industry, and his reform measures also need time to be implemented. But the short-term employment system does not allow him to do so.

According to historical records, Emperor Xuandi of the Western Han Dynasty said when selecting officials: "The governors are officials who are close to the people, and the first thing is important. If you move out soon after taking office, the people will not get benefits, and they will welcome the new year and send the old year, just looking at trouble. " At that time, all the grass-roots officials who served as county magistrate were required to serve for a long time. From this point of view, our current practice is not as good as that of the Western Han Dynasty. "Being an excellent enterprise is an official" is still the subjective motivation that leads to the short-term behavior of operators.

In addition, in order to solve the problem of combining long-term and short-term goals, we might as well use the balanced scorecard.

Balanced scorecard not only focuses on short-term goals; Also attaches importance to non-financial goals. The latter is a relatively long-term goal, which drives financial goals. These goals are not set and shelved now, but tracked by measuring indicators and realized in current actions. Long-term goals are not goals to be pursued in the future, but things to be done now, which ultimately promote long-term results.

At the same time, the balanced scorecard attaches great importance to the design and measurement of pre-indicators. In fact, customer satisfaction is only a lagging indicator, and the time spent on customers is the leading indicator. It is these leading indicators that bring customer satisfaction, and it is the design and measurement of leading indicators that truly reflect long-term behavior.

Therefore, we must organically combine long-term goals with short-term goals and "learn from each other's strengths". In order to make short-term goals contribute to the realization of long-term goals, it is necessary to make plans to achieve each goal and combine these plans into a master plan to check whether they are logical, consistent and realistic.

"Values are difficult to cross the behavioral gap"

Values hang in the air at 50,000 feet and must be brought back to the real world.

Dilemma: Art of War on Paper

Enterprises have culture, and enterprises unite employees because of culture, so they have fighting capacity and vitality.

If an enterprise does not have firm values and codes of conduct, it will make employees lose their direction and codes of conduct.

Mr. Liu Chuanzhi, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Legend Holdings, once said, "Small enterprises do things and big enterprises behave themselves". All these show the importance of corporate culture and values for an enterprise, especially for an enterprise determined to be a century-old shop.

At present, many enterprises have fully realized this and started to sort out their unique values and corporate culture. However, how to make the culture and values of the enterprise really affect the behavior of employees and make it become the code of conduct of the enterprise, which makes many enterprise managers at a loss.

For example, an office building property management company recently combed its corporate values: "I create for the company, contribute to the company, and the company is my home." The author asked the staff two simple questions: What does this sentence mean? What did you do? Many employees can't answer, just laugh it off.

As a result of this phenomenon, organized corporate culture only plays the role of propaganda, and employees do not feel its role.

This brings a problem. Enterprises have their own values, but they don't know how to evaluate whether employees do it, and then turn it into everyone's behavior.

Tip: Six Steps to Reality

In order to solve this problem, according to the experience of successful enterprises, the author thinks that we can work from the following six aspects, which is the so-called six-step method of behavioral enterprise values.

Step 1: The company set up a value behaviorism group. The composition of the team can be composed of personnel transferred from various departments, and it is a temporary team in stages. The requirement for personnel is to have a good understanding of the company's culture and history, and to have strong communication skills and summary skills.

Step 2: Define the company's values. The value behavior group interviewed the company's top management, learned the connotation of the company's values through interviews, and clearly described the values.

For example, the values of an enterprise emphasize employees' learning and summing-up ability, which is defined and described as: having the ability of self-improvement, learning from experience, shaping their behavior according to external feedback information, constantly updating their working methods, and constantly optimizing their work.

Step 3: Describe the behaviors and evaluation criteria corresponding to the values. The value behaviorist team made clear what the behaviors corresponding to the company's values are through interviews with the middle and senior management, excellent employees and managers, that is, to find the behaviors that the company clearly advocates and opposes.

For example, the learning summary ability mentioned above, its corresponding behavior and evaluation criteria are as follows:

The same mistake happened many times. 1 point

You can avoid repeating the same mistakes, but you can't prevent them before they happen. 2 points

Learning at work can learn from mistakes, draw inferences from others, and prevent problems before they happen. 3 points

Consciously learn the knowledge, skills and advanced experience of the industry needed for the post, and practice it in the work. 4 points

In addition to the knowledge and skills required by the post, I also actively learn other related knowledge and skills, and my working ability has been significantly improved. 5 points

Step 4: Form enterprise value behavior. Complete all behaviors and evaluation standards, form the first draft of enterprise value behavior, submit it to the middle and high level of the company for discussion, and make corresponding modifications, and finally form the standard enterprise value behavior.

Step 5: Publicize all employees. Another important task of the corporate values behaviorism group is to develop courses. Through combing and summarizing the excellent behavior cases of enterprises, we will develop corresponding topics, which will be taught by the senior management of enterprises in person and publicized step by step, so that all employees can know what kind of behavior is advocated and what kind of behavior is not allowed.

Step 6: Form the behavior evaluation table and evaluation standard corresponding to the values, and make a quantitative score for each behavior, thus

The daily assessment of values and behaviors truly transforms the values of enterprises into the specific behaviors of employees.

"goals are out of touch with strategy"

Doing the right thing is more important than doing it right.

Dilemma: lose your way

If you choose "the most boring job for managers", "assessment" will definitely be among the best.

Frequent assessment cycles, complicated forms, complicated assessment items, and bargaining between superiors and subordinates when setting goals ... all these will not give managers a headache.

What is the reason for this boring situation?

The author thinks that the disconnection between performance goals and enterprise strategy is an important factor.

First of all, many enterprises blindly pursue the "comprehensiveness" of performance goals. In order not to miss the target, enterprises often list various indicators and design corresponding standards for assessment. Some departments undertake more than 30 indicators.

This seemingly comprehensive consideration will actually only bring two results.

On the one hand, people's energy is scattered and they can't concentrate on key goals, especially strategic goals. Psychological research has proved that people's psychological energy can only pay attention to about 7 units in a period of time. Having many goals is the same as having no goals.

On the other hand, people often adopt the principle of "sacrificing innovation and making fewer mistakes" because they can't give consideration to both. Therefore, departments with good performance will not get bad evaluation because there are no big mistakes.

After careful study, there are two assumptions behind the comprehensive pursuit of goals. One assumption is that employees are naturally lazy, so they need external resources.