How to deal with leaders who are hypocritical and arrogant

there is a friend who joined a company as HR six months ago. Every time he did something, the leader said to delegate power, but in fact, the power was firmly in his hand.

The final work is difficult to carry out. The work has no own rhythm, and it can't be planned in advance.

Every time I communicate with the leader what kind of results he wants to achieve, I can only get one sentence: "It's up to you. "

In the end, there was a job and all kinds of dissatisfaction. I tried some methods to change this situation, but the effect was not good.

In fact, it is difficult to define the right and wrong of leadership. Faced with such leadership, we can try to figure out the psychological activities of leadership that may be hidden behind these words first, and it may be easier to say "what to do" later.

1

The article behind the leadership practice

"Decentralization"

can be simply understood as letting you work boldly and not be afraid of making mistakes.

It means "there are leaders behind us". Of course, if you work boldly and freely, the work will be completed quickly and well, so the leader will have face in front of his leader, which is good for the future promotion and salary increase of the leader.

Therefore, leaders say that "decentralization" and progress can make the work better, and make employees feel comfortable on the surface. Thanks to the leaders.

because you have some power, it's all given by the leader.

when I retired, I had an unexpected situation, so I can say that I only knew why, and my subordinates acted boldly.

"grasping power"

Clearly speaking, "delegating power" is actually tightly grasping power in one's hand. Here's an extension of "grasping power":

Perhaps the leader thinks that employees are inexperienced, incompetent and thoughtless, and they need to report to him for instructions on major and minor matters before employees can implement it. This is ok for subordinates with poor comprehensive ability.

Maybe the leader is not very busy. If there are not many chores and small things to deal with, is it easy for his leader to see that he is idle? Over time, he will be dispensable. This is understandable because of the urgency and pressure of work.

maybe his leadership is all about details. If the leader of the leadership likes to pursue perfection, he should learn from his subordinates in every detail, and if his subordinates' answers are inaccurate and untimely, he should criticize them, then his subordinates can only ask themselves in this way. This way of working is passed from top to bottom, which is also a helpless move.

maybe leaders like to control others. Some people don't have high positions and few subordinates, but they just like to manage and control them. Even some private lives and families of subordinates have to ask questions, not to mention everything at work. Such people just like to show themselves everywhere and let others see their existence. If so, it is hard to change.

Of course, there may be other circumstances that lead to the leader's practice of "virtual decentralization and real power". What kind or combination is it? Please take your seats accordingly.

"It is difficult to carry out the work"

Although this means that it is difficult for employees to carry out their work, from the employee's point of view, it is caused by "the leader is grasping power", but in fact, the leader can blame the employees. Why is the work so slow?

is this simple logical process and the expectation of work results what leaders want? If the leader wants to clean up the employees, is it a matter of time, place and minutes? If the employees' comprehensive performance is still good and listen to the leaders, it depends on the mood of the leaders.

"Work has no rhythm"

Of course, it means that there is no employee's own work rhythm. It seems that with employees' own rhythm, employees can have a certain understanding and grasp of the work process and results, and the results are good or bad, and employees are basically confident.

If that is the case, the leader will definitely feel insecure: You are so capable, and my leader will find you one day. At that time, I won't be redundant. How can this work?

Therefore, leaders will definitely try to find a way, so that the working rhythm can't be mastered and controlled by subordinates, and they can't fully understand it. Since there is a clear literal rhythm, they can't tell all the subordinates, only the unimportant things.

"No planning, strong mobility"

Have you ever heard of "chaos management"? It is of course good to have a plan. The direction and main contents of our work are not easy to make mistakes, and leaders and subordinates have a bottom in their hearts.

However, if the plan is too good and too detailed, is it not conducive to the "improvisation" of leaders, and does it not reflect the value of leaders' existence at any time and place?

In addition, the leader can of course weaken the role of planning and planning in his work on the grounds of "planning is not as fast as changing" and "no matter how good the planning is, it doesn't change in time", so as to "simplify" or "simply handle" the planning openly, so as to achieve the effect of "playing a leading role temporarily".

even for personnel work, on the surface, it can be planned every month, half a year or even the whole year.

however, the specific implementation really needs to be changed according to the actual situation, including the time, place, implementation method and the effect achieved.

For example, a planned outward bound training, including fees, participants, time and lecturers, has been determined in advance, but it is entirely possible that it will be cancelled or postponed later because the leader is looking for another institution, the company is busy, and the leader has something to do temporarily.

Planned work may change for various reasons, not to mention those things that pop up temporarily. If leaders deliberately increase their "mobility", then temporary work and emergency events will increase. Isn't this an opportunity to reflect the value of leadership?

"It's up to you"

It's estimated that everyone has met such a manager. Let's see what's wrong with this statement:

1. Too simple

It means that "such a simple thing" is still asked, and it's not easy for the leader to criticize it directly. Let's take this sentence and let the subordinates guess for themselves.

2. Who do I ask

The leader himself doesn't know "what result things want to achieve", because his leader didn't explicitly say, if you ask him, who does he ask?

3. Make you make mistakes

Generally speaking, the leader must be clear about the "result of thinking" when arranging or arranging work. If he says "It's up to you" to his subordinates, he is generally unwilling to let them handle things smoothly, or he doesn't like the subordinates very much, hoping that they will make mistakes in some work, so that it is more convenient and well-founded to manage and punish them.

4. Ask him to

let you "do it at will" at any time. Do you know clearly? What do you want to do? In the course of things, you should always ask for instructions and report to him. You can't deliberately fool around with the implementation without knowing it. This is what the leader wants, so that you can always circle around him.

5.

What kind of thing is beneficial to him is the most beneficial to the leader, but the leader can't explain it to his subordinates personally, which requires the subordinates to figure out the various interests in this matter.

If the subordinates want to get the answer directly from the leader, it is definitely impossible, and they can save the country by curve: asking more experienced colleagues, asking the leaders' cronies, etc.

The above is only a simple analysis of the article behind the above practices. How can the leaders be satisfied with the work results handed over by employees?

Even if we try to improve it, the effect will definitely be bad. What should we do?

2

Three tricks to get such a leader

After analyzing the past and coming over, we can simply sum up its characteristics:

First, its business ability and management ability are not strong, second, it likes to form gangs, and third, it doesn't like "people who don't appreciate themselves". As a result, in order to make their work more effective, employees can try this way:

1) Find the bright spot and praise appropriately

Everyone has something worth learning and praising, whether it is appearance, height, body shape, specialty, knowledge, experience, work ability, interpersonal relationship, social background, or dress, expression, clothing, family members, etc.

as long as you look at and dig with a discovery rather than a criticism, you can certainly find many bright spots slowly.

You can't praise these flash points all at once, but show them gradually and one or two times a day, so that the leader can feel that you are really concentrating on discovering his advantages, not pretending or being hypocritical.

At first, you'd better praise this praise in front of your face, and then say it slowly in public. You should say it behind his back in front of other colleagues or leaders, and they will certainly reach the leaders soon. Let them be the mouthpiece, and the effect will be better.

A leader is a human being. Even if his heart is made of iron, it will be melted by the praise you slowly release. The leader will gradually accept you, which can be seen from his attitude, tone and whether he speaks to you actively.

2) Do some personal things for him

Only praise him, and the leader will generally not admit it, let alone fundamentally change his view of you, and the leader will still think that "you are not his person". Need to further close the relationship with him, can do a few private affairs for him.

For example, family members are employed, relatives are sick, and they come forward when they are in dispute with others. If it involves borrowing money, I think it's ok to borrow less than 1, yuan. If there are too many, please find a clever reason to push it, and it's also difficult to prevent borrowing easily.

In this way, you can easily accept you and become a member of his team only if you often walk into his private space and let you know his family, friends and his own difficulties, and you do something practical for him.

3) Make up for his shortcomings

This kind of leader is generally average in business and management. If your ability is not as good as his, there are not as many ways to make up for his shortcomings in these aspects, and it is difficult for you to be his right-hand man, you can only be his follower and follower at most.

If your ability is stronger than his, don't be jealous of why he became your leader, not.

3

Be prepared for the second hand

If you don't adapt to or despise the above-mentioned leadership, you need to be prepared for the second hand.

Because when you work in front of such a leader, you don't even know when something will go wrong. Once something goes wrong, you must be appointed by him as a real gun. He won't protect you, but will push you out to be a scapegoat. What should we do?

1) You can't ask a bigger leader

When you ask a leader and you can't know the result of the work, if you ask the leader of the leader, your leader will know about it at the first time, and he will try every means to blame you and force you to leave. By doing so, you will leave earlier, faster and worse.

2) Take the initiative to leave

If you work in front of such a leader, something will happen sooner or later, and you will be blamed. Instead of leaving passively, you might as well resign gracefully and at least leave a good reputation inside and outside the circle, which will help your future career.

3) Accumulate your own relationship

In this way, everyone can be your leader, and what does the company recognize him?

Generally speaking, the most important thing may be "blown social relations".

For example, know the leaders of this bureau and that committee, and what specific and difficult things they have accomplished; Secondly, the relationship with the main leaders of the company is relatively hard, that is to say, there are leaders on it.