Imitation of work is a subtle, but almost incurable disease of most modern companies, from monopolistic giants to small enterprises, where the cat cried even for employees. Everywhere the same picture is repeated: a manager discussing his plans for the weekend via ICQ during working hours, a secretary who sorts things out with a friend on the office phone, or an intern writing a love letter on the office computer. They have one thing in common - they are all very busy. In any case, if some unexpected manager tries to find out what they are doing at the moment, it will surely turn out that the working day of each of them is scheduled literally by the minute. At the same time, the real result of the activity is often, at best, “monkey labor”, completely useless for the employer.

What is "imitation work"? It is difficult to give an answer to this question, because it is diverse and elusive, from an attempt to present an insignificant job as a great achievement to a distortion of the results of the enterprise by a top manager. The moral or even legal classification of pseudo-work is the subject of a separate discussion. Suffice it to say that, in the opinion of many employers, "imitators" have much in common, for example, with nesuns, with the only difference being that in this case, the object of theft is the employee's working time belonging to the employer. We will try to identify the various types of this "perverted work" and understand the reasons that cause employees to turn into imitators. Perhaps this will allow us to find a remedy for the organizational malady that has already taken the socialist economy to the grave (recall the endless tea parties at work before the collapse of the Soviet Union), and now threatens to gradually take over the market economy as well.

"Damn want to work"

The phrase "Damn want to work!", Said in the late 80s of the last century by Yegor Kuzmich Ligachev (perhaps the youngest readers do not even know who he is), once amused the whole country. Oddly enough, it has the most direct relation to our topic. Indeed, why do employees imitate work? Is it just because of laziness, or is it not so simple?

After talking with management experts, I came to the conclusion that there are at least three types of imitation. One of them is really the result of a lack of motivation and, perhaps, the wrong selection of employees who simply do not want to work (is this the kind that can be called? imitation from laziness?).

Another type of imitation, according to Alexander Zurabov, former president of Aeroflot, is specific to Russia, primarily to large companies (especially state or semi-state ones). The Russian employee often believes that work should be a source of all sorts of "extra pleasures". If this expectation can be realized, then the fulfillment of basic duties becomes only an obstacle to obtaining the “main pleasure”. The remuneration for the main job ceases to be the main source of income, although in order to receive additional “pleasures”, the employee must continue to work in this position. Therefore, he has to imitate the main work, so that more time and effort remain for the “most interesting” ...

In addition, in large companies, employees are often hired for positions that are simply not necessary or not very necessary for the actual work of the organization. “As a result,” Andrey Polozov-Yablonsky, project manager at Aeroflot, says based on his previous experience, “employees often imitate work simply out of a sense of self-preservation in order to prove to management that they are supposedly useful.” Imagine for a moment that you are a new employee in a large company. Perhaps you, like Yegor Kuzmich Ligachev in his time, "didn't want to work." However, it turns out that your own job function is not defined or insufficient for a full load, and the rigid bureaucratic structure of the company does not allow you to switch to something else.

The obstacle that finally puts an end to all your timid attempts to get involved in real work may be the “corporate culture” surrounding you. It would be more accurate to say "anti-corporate", if corporate culture is understood as a symbolic environment that is consistent with the solution of the organization's business problems. Instead, the company often develops standards of behavior and social environment that are directly opposed to the interests of the business. Such an environment greets a new employee with ill-concealed irritation: “What do you need most of all”! Live and let others live.

If you are not a heroic personality like Ibsen's Brandt, then, faced with a similar reaction from colleagues, you will probably either start acting like everyone else, or simply try to find another job. Choosing the first option, you immediately plunge into the abyss of imitation. Although most leaders have long known its most popular methods, they, however, do not become less common because of this.

Strategies for the slacker

According to Sergey Filonovich, Dean of the Graduate School of Management of the State University-Higher School of Economics, the various strategies used by employees in the process of imitating work can be divided into two main types: those that prevent the creation of a negative impression and, accordingly, demotion, and those that focused on career advancement. The main tricks of the first group are isolation (-I have nothing to do with it?, “It's none of my business”), an apology (imitation of sincere repentance), or the presentation of one's own failure as an inevitable consequence of circumstances. Their common goal is to hide flaws in their own work.

The main strategy of the second group is based on the principle of "sweat - show yourself to the authorities." Its essence is to constantly demonstrate to management the intensity of their own work, regardless of its effectiveness.

Another type of imitation - joining in someone else's activity - is well illustrated by the anecdote about the fly that said: "We plowed - me and the tractor." The strategy of "multiplication of obstacles" is that the employee tries to inflate as much as possible in the eyes of the management the amount of work done by him to achieve some, even real, result.

The list of tricks goes on, and all of them, when skillfully executed, are quite difficult to recognize (after all, repentance, and the inevitable set of circumstances, and a large amount of work done may well be real, not simulated). Using all these tricks, employees, in fact, are engaged in "impression management", that is, they manage the perception of the leader, sometimes using quite sophisticated psychological methods. Finding them can be quite difficult.

How to deal with imitation

According to Sergei Filonovich, one of the rules for combating imitation can be formulated as follows: work can be depicted only when it is poorly planned. If the employee is given specific quantitative tasks and deadlines are specified, then it becomes much more difficult to imitate. That is why, according to Sergey Orlovsky, CEO and founder of the company, imitation is the least of all threats to small companies where the work of each employee is visible to everyone. At Nival itself, for example, all managers once a week (or every six months, if we are talking about strategic results) exchange e-mail messages containing a report on the work done. The same is done by ordinary employees of the company in their functional divisions. At the same time, each of them, together with the management (or, if we are talking about management, with other members of the management team), develops a plan of their own activities for a month or a year. Efficiency of work is evaluated by the results of the implementation of this plan. Naturally, the plan is tied to the strategic goals of the organization, but the employee personally participates in the development of the criteria by which his work will be evaluated. According to Sergey Orlovsky, similar methods are applicable in large companies, however, large organizations must first be “split” into teams of no more than 30 people. That is exactly what the leadership did.

Note that the method described by Sergei Orlovsky is to measure the effectiveness of the performance results. In one form or another, the philosophy of “evaluating by results” is applied in almost all companies, and it seems to be the only one possible from the point of view of common sense. “I don’t care what you do (within the law or the rules, of course), as long as there is a result!” - with such parting words, the head (manager, owner) most often addresses his subordinate. At the same time, it has been proven for quite a long time that only one measurement of the result is not enough to determine the effectiveness.

The paradox of measurement

According to Alexander Zurabov, any quantitative indicator, if compensation or career advancement of an employee depends on it, immediately begins to be distorted by the employee himself. As confirmation, an example from my own journalistic practice. When a performance management system for editorial was introduced at an Internet company, the initial criterion was the number of articles published by each employee in a week. Naturally, as a result, all employees immediately tried to maximize the amount of materials at the expense of their quality. Then the management set a new criterion: attendance, the number of users who "clicked" on the material. And again, the result was by no means an improvement in the quality of articles. Instead, employees began to use "icteric" headlines and topics or super-enticing announcements that do not correspond to the content of the material, and, in fact, exploit the trust of readers in the resource. The result of one employee was achieved at the cost of damage to the long-term reputation of the publication. At the same time, those who believe that it is not difficult to identify such tricks do not take into account the complexity of an objective and, at the same time, formalized assessment of the quantity and quality of the work done, in this case, journalistic work.

This problem, by the way, is not exclusively a property of small companies and small positions. Something similar has caused some of the biggest corporate scandals of recent times: Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat. The misfortune of all these companies was an ill-conceived system of control over the activities of top managers based on the formal result. Shareholders of companies did not want (or did not have the opportunity) to monitor business processes, so the boards of directors made the only criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of top managers a formal quantitative indicator, for example, the growth of stock prices. In response to this, top managers began to imitate effective work, manipulating the evaluation criterion to the detriment of real business, in particular, “pumping up” the value of shares and thereby endangering long-term financial performance. As a result, the inevitable collapse followed, before which, however, top managers managed to receive multimillion-dollar bonuses for "effective management." Further evaluation of their "effectiveness", unfortunately, is already the responsibility of the judicial and investigative authorities, and not the boards of directors of the destroyed companies.

The problem posed turns out to be almost philosophical, because, in essence, any formalized measurement of the results of human labor is a distortion of reality. Even Norton and Kaplan showed that the evaluation of the performance of both an individual employee and the entire organization as a whole in terms of results (for example, financial) always lags behind the present, showing rather the situation in the recent past. Such an assessment would actually be based on past, not current, achievements. According to Alexander Zurabov, a truly objective assessment should take into account not only the result, but also the process itself, that is, the way in which this result was obtained.

As a result, it turns out that the only effective way to combat imitation is to change the corporate culture of the company, reorienting it to the measurement of significant processes (training, customer satisfaction), and not achieving “results at any cost”. This requires a change in the main business paradigm, so it is difficult to say when such training organizations will appear in Russia.

In the meantime, many companies place their main hope in the fight against imitation in the creation of a "corporate Gulag". On the websites of companies producing security systems, every now and then you can see various offers of software packages that allow you to take into account the time of arrival and departure of an employee, the number of exits to the toilet, smoke breaks, lunch breaks, and so on. There are also complex reporting systems for the use of working time (moreover, it takes employees up to 20% of the working time to fill out all forms), and to top it all off, there are hardware: locks, barriers, fingerprint identifiers and similar security equipment. However, previous experience shows that while there is a guerrilla war between an employee and a corporation, the employee will always be the winner, and it is unlikely that the advent of modern technical means can radically change the balance of power.

There are days when you don't want to work at all. And it happens to everyone. And while some of us manage to overcome laziness and get to work, others prefer only to portray a hectic work activity.

Once embarking on this path, a person can become such a skilled simulator that no one will suspect that at work a person is busy with anything but business. Quite often, imitators of violent activity disguise themselves so successfully that even the authorities consider them almost the most productive employees, and accordingly promote them. However, as you understand, there are not so many benefits for the company from such employees. Therefore, let's try to figure out how to figure out a simulator of violent activity in your office.

Why imitate work?

It would seem that there is something incomprehensible? A person imitates violent activity in order to receive wages, while not straining. This is partly true. However, it is also worth thinking about the fact that posing as a Stakhanovite and creating the image of a constantly busy worker, an employee spends a lot of energy and strength that he could direct to the implementation of the tasks that were set for him.

1. One of the common reasons why a person imitates hectic activity at work is low motivation. Probably, a person does not see prospects for himself in the company, and he is not at all interested in what he should do.

2. The employee is simply not provided with the necessary amount of work. It also happens that the employer hires an excessive number of employees, and there is simply not enough work for everyone. Naturally, it is unlikely that anyone will talk about this directly, because it may come to the head of the boss to simply reduce the staff. And it is absolutely not profitable for an employee to lose a place where he is regularly paid a salary, while not overloading him with work.

3. The salary of an employee is fixed and does not change in any way depending on the quality of the job. For example, if a salesperson receives the same salary, whether he serves 20 or 50 customers a day, there is naturally no reason for him to try.

4. A person is loaded with duties that are not within the scope of his competence. Naturally, a rare employee will want to do someone else's work. Especially if the additional duties will not affect his salary in any way.

5. Total control and distrust on the part of the manager also makes the employee pretend to be terribly busy all the time. When the boss initially sees a loafer and a liar in every employee, in the end, the team gets tired of proving that this is not so, and instead of fruitful work, people begin to imitate violent activity.

6. When a talented employee sees that less talented colleagues are constantly being promoted, the thought inevitably comes to his mind that he is not appreciated. And why try when no one will appreciate your work anyway?

7. The lack of attention and feedback from the employer sometimes makes a person look for ways to stand out from colleagues. However, not everyone is able to earn the attention of management by real labor achievements. But, by portraying constant employment and showing awareness of all the affairs of the company, many achieve their goal. And often maintaining the image sometimes makes you distract from direct work.

Signs of imitation of violent activity

1. Unreasonable hassle. You have never seen an employee at rest. If he is heading somewhere, he either moves quickly or even runs.

2. Excessive activity. The person speaks quickly, gushes with ideas, fusses, gives advice to colleagues left and right, shows complete awareness of everything that happens in the company.

3. The workplace of an employee is either a uniform mess, or a strangely organized system. On the one hand, a lot of papers are scattered on the table, in which the employee tirelessly rummages. On the other hand, the computer monitor is a little less than completely plastered with colored stickers that list upcoming tasks. This makes the workplace more solid. It can be seen with the naked eye: a person is all in business. There is no time to even clean up the table.

4. The person always looks very tired, irritated. His slightly sloppy appearance will eloquently tell you that the employee has absolutely no time to take care of his appearance, as he is completely absorbed in work.

5. An employee can look at the monitor with a thoughtful look for half a day, but as soon as the boss passes nearby, he convulsively begins to minimize the browser windows.

6. A person arrives at work early and is the last to leave.

7. An employee almost always takes work home, leaving the office with an impressive pile of papers.

8. The employee does his best to let his colleagues know that he works even after hours: he asks professional questions at night, on weekends and on holidays, thereby making it clear that 8 hours of work is not the limit for him.

Naturally, all of the above signs can give out not only an imitator, but also a real workaholic who really works day and night. However, the described behavior of the workaholic is accompanied by more than specific professional achievements.

In addition, if you really ask a working person in the sweat of his face what he is doing right now, he will answer more than specifically. The one who only imitates vigorous activity, despite apparent diligence, cannot boast of outstanding labor indicators, and answers the question about current work vaguely, tries to change the subject or shift attention to other issues.

What to do if there is an imitator in your team?

If you find that one or more of your employees are faking a flurry of activity, you have a few options. The first thing you want to do is, of course, deal with the loafer, fined or even fired. This is one of the more obvious options. However, is it worth it? Try to analyze how useful an employee is to your company. Also remember if this behavior has always characterized him.

If, from the day he joined the company, a person did nothing but fuss, and there are not so many real successes in his work, you can think about dismissal. Call an employee for a chat. Give him a list of his real merits and compare with the number of tasks assigned. Find out why your orders are not being fulfilled and give 2-3 months to correct the situation. If nothing changes at the end of this period, fire.

If the situation is such that initially a promising and talented employee came to work for you, ready to work and develop, and after some time the enthusiasm subsided, you will have to find out what is the reason for such a decline. Perhaps the employee is dissatisfied with the working conditions, poorly motivated, or not provided with the required amount of work. A frank conversation will certainly help resolve differences and restore the person's confidence that his work is appreciated. And if this conversation is reinforced by actions on your part aimed at improving conditions, you will soon again receive a loyal employee who shows high results.

Another reason why a person pretends more than works may be that he is simply tired. Send him on vacation. Often this helps.

How to prevent imitation of violent activity in a team?

1. Don't forget to motivate your employees.

2. Clearly define the scope of authority for each employee.

3. Clearly formulate the goals, objectives, results and deadlines for the implementation of a particular task. Also, do not forget to mention what reward awaits the employee if he successfully copes (bonus, promotion, etc.)

4. Do not leave the success of employees without attention. Encourage them.

5. Formulate the tasks and deadlines for the completion of work in writing (by e-mail or in Internet messengers.) This will eliminate such reasons for not fulfilling your assignment as “I forgot” or “you didn’t say”.

6. Be interested in the affairs and current mood of subordinates. This will allow you to respond to their needs in a timely manner.

7. Control the execution of your orders. Arrange periodic summing up of the work of departments and each individual employee. But don't overdo the reporting. If, instead of working, an employee is forced to fill out lengthy reports every day, this will lead him to think that you do not trust him. In addition, excessive documentation has not yet made anyone happy.

In general, if the imitation of violent activity has become a general phenomenon in your organization, then it's time to reconsider your views on personnel policy and enterprise management.

Imitation of work and what to do with it

Alexey Gostev, Headhunter.Ru

Imitation of work is a subtle, but almost incurable disease of most modern companies, from monopoly giants to small enterprises, where the cat cried even for employees. Everywhere the same picture is repeated: a manager discussing his plans for the weekend via ICQ during working hours, a secretary sorting things out with a friend on the office phone, or an intern composing a love letter on the office computer. They have one thing in common - they are all very busy. In any case, if some unexpected leader tries to find out their occupation at the moment, it will surely turn out that the working day of each of them is scheduled literally by the minute. At the same time, often the real result of the activity is, at best, “monkey labor”, completely useless for the employer.

What is "imitation work"? It is difficult to give an answer to this question, because it is diverse and elusive, from an attempt to pass off insignificant work as a great achievement to a distortion of the results of the enterprise by a top manager. The moral or even legal classification of pseudo-work is the subject of a separate discussion. Suffice it to say that, in the opinion of many employers, "imitators" have much in common, for example, with nesuns, with the only difference being that in this case the object of theft is the employee's working time belonging to the employer. We will try to identify the various types of this "perverted work" and understand the reasons that cause employees to turn into imitators. Perhaps this will allow us to find a remedy for the organizational malady that has already taken the socialist economy to the grave (recall the endless tea parties at work before the collapse of the Soviet Union), and now threatens to gradually take over the market economy as well.

"Damn want to work"

The phrase “Damn I want to work!”, Pronounced in the late 80s of the last century by Yegor Kuzmich Ligachev (perhaps the youngest readers don’t even know who he is), once amused the whole country. Oddly enough, it has the most to our topic direct relation. Indeed, why do employees imitate work? Is it just because of laziness, or is it not so simple?

After talking with management experts, I came to the conclusion that at least three types of imitation can be distinguished. One of them really is the result of a lack of motivation and, possibly, the wrong selection of employees who simply do not want to work (it is this type that can be conditionally called “imitation from laziness").

Another type of imitation, according to Alexander Zurabov, former president of Aeroflot, is specific to Russia, primarily to large companies (especially state-owned or semi-state ones). The Russian employee often believes that work should be a source of all sorts of "extra pleasures." If this expectation can be realized, then the fulfillment of the main duties becomes only an obstacle to obtaining the “main pleasure”. The remuneration for the main job ceases to be the main source of income, although in order to receive additional “pleasures”, the employee must continue to work in this position. Therefore, he has to imitate the main work, so that more time can be spent on “the most interesting” ...

In addition, in large companies, employees are often hired for positions that are simply not necessary or not very necessary for the actual work of the organization. “As a result,” Andrey Polozov-Yablonsky, project manager at Aeroflot, says based on his previous experience, “employees often imitate work simply out of a sense of self-preservation in order to prove their imaginary usefulness to management.” Imagine for a moment that you are a new employee in a large company. Perhaps you, like Yegor Kuzmich Ligachev in his time, “fucking want to work.” However, it turns out that your own job function is not defined or insufficient for a full load, and the rigid bureaucratic structure of the company does not allow you to switch to something else.

The obstacle that finally puts an end to all your timid attempts to get involved in real work may be the “corporate culture” surrounding you. It would be more accurate to say "anti-corporate" if corporate culture is understood as a symbolic environment that is consistent with the solution of the organization's business problems. Instead, the company often develops standards of behavior and a social environment that is directly opposed to the interests of the business. Such an environment greets a new employee with ill-concealed irritation: “Do you need more than anyone else ?! Live and do not interfere with the lives of others.

If you are not a heroic personality like Ibsen's Brandt, then, faced with a similar reaction from colleagues, you will probably either start acting like everyone else, or simply try to find another job. Choosing the first option, you immediately plunge into the abyss of imitation. Running methods have long been known, however, they do not become less common because of this.

Strategies for the slacker

According to Sergey Filonovich, Dean of the Graduate School of Management of the State University-Higher School of Economics, the various strategies used by employees in the process of imitating work can be divided into two main types: those that prevent the creation of a negative impression and, accordingly, demotion, and those that are aimed at career advancement .The main tricks of the first group are isolation (“I have nothing to do with it”, “it's none of my business”), an apology (imitation of sincere remorse) or the presentation of one's own failure as an inevitable consequence of circumstances. Their common goal is to hide flaws in their own work.

The main strategy of the second group is based on the principle of "sweat - show yourself to the authorities." Its essence is to constantly demonstrate to the management the intensity of their own work, regardless of its effectiveness.

Another type of imitation - joining someone else's activity - is well illustrated by the anecdote about the fly that said: "We plowed - I'm a tractor." The strategy of "multiplication of obstacles" is that the employee tries to inflate as much as possible in the eyes of the management the amount of work done by him to achieve some, even real, result.

The list of tricks can be continued, and all of them, if skillfully executed, are quite difficult to recognize (after all, remorse, and the inevitable set of circumstances, and a large amount of work done may well be real, not simulated). Using all these tricks, employees, in fact, are engaged in "impression management", that is, they manage the perception of the leader, sometimes using rather sophisticated psychological methods. Finding them can be quite difficult.

How to deal with imitation

According to Sergei Filonovich, one of the rules for combating imitation can be formulated as follows: work can be depicted only when it is poorly planned. If the employee is given specific quantitative tasks and deadlines, then it becomes much more difficult to imitate. That is why, according to Sergey Orlovsky, CEO and founder of the company, imitation is the least of all threats to small companies, where the work of each employee is visible to everyone. At Nival itself, for example, all managers once a week (or every six months, if we are talking about strategic results ) exchange electronic messages containing a progress report. The same is done by ordinary employees of the company in their functional divisions. At the same time, each of them, together with the management (or, if we are talking about management, with other members of the management team), develops a plan for their own activities for a month or a year. Efficiency of work is evaluated by the results of the implementation of this plan. Naturally, the plan is tied to the strategic goals of the organization, but the employee personally participates in the development of the criteria by which his work will be evaluated. According to Sergei Orlovsky, such methods are also applicable in large companies, however, large organizations must first be “split” into teams of no more than 30 people. This is exactly what the leadership did.

Note that the method described by Sergei Orlovsky is to measure performance based on performance. In one form or another, the philosophy of “evaluating by results” is applied in almost all companies, and it seems to be the only one possible from the point of view of common sense. “I don’t care what you do (within the law or the rules, of course), as long as there is a result!” - with such parting words, the head (manager, owner) most often addresses his subordinate. At the same time, it has been proved for quite a long time that only one measurement of the result is not enough to determine the effectiveness.

The paradox of measurement

According to Alexander Zurabov, any quantitative indicator, if compensation or career advancement of an employee depends on it, immediately begins to be distorted by the employee himself. As confirmation, an example from my own journalistic practice. When a performance management system for editorial was introduced at an Internet company, the initial criterion was the number of articles each employee published per week. Naturally, as a result, all employees immediately tried to maximize the amount of materials at the expense of their quality. Then the management set a new criterion: attendance, the number of users who "clicked" on the material. Again, the result was by no means an improvement in the quality of articles. Instead, employees began to use "icteric" headlines and topics or super-enticing announcements that do not correspond to the content of the material, and, in fact, exploit the trust of readers in the resource. The result of one employee was achieved at the cost of damage to the long-term reputation of the publication. At the same time, those who believe that it is not difficult to identify such tricks do not take into account the complexity of an objective and, at the same time, formalized assessment of the quantity and quality of the work done, in this case, journalistic work.

This problem, by the way, is not exclusively a property of small companies and small positions. Something similar was the cause of the most high-profile corporate scandals of recent times: Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat. The misfortune of all these companies was an ill-conceived system of control over the activities of top managers based on the formal result. Shareholders of companies did not want (or did not have the opportunity) to monitor business processes, so the boards of directors made the only criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of top managers a formal quantitative indicator, for example, the growth of stock prices. In response to this, top managers began to imitate effective work, manipulating the evaluation criterion to the detriment of real business, in particular, “pumping up” the value of shares and thereby endangering long-term financial performance. The result was an inevitable crash, before which, however, top managers managed to receive multimillion-dollar bonuses for "effective management." Further evaluation of their "effectiveness", unfortunately, is already the responsibility of the judicial and investigative authorities, and not the boards of directors of the destroyed companies.

The problem posed turns out to be almost philosophical, because, in essence, any formalized measurement of the results of human labor is a distortion of reality. Even Norton and Kaplan showed that the evaluation of the performance of both an individual employee and the entire organization as a whole in terms of results (for example, financial) always lags behind the present, showing rather the situation in the recent past. Such an assessment will actually be based on past, not current, achievements. According to Alexander Zurabov, a truly objective assessment should take into account not only the result, but also the process itself, that is, the way in which this result was obtained.

As a result, it turns out that the only effective way to combat imitation is to change the corporate culture of the company, reorienting it to measuring significant processes (training, customer satisfaction), and not achieving “results at any cost.” This requires a change in the main business paradigm, so it’s hard to say when such training organizations will appear in Russia.

In the meantime, many companies place their main hope in the fight against imitation in the creation of a "corporate Gulag". On the websites of companies producing security systems, every now and then you can see various offers of software packages that allow you to take into account the time of arrival and departure of an employee, the number of exits to the toilet, smoke breaks, lunch breaks, and so on. There are also complex reporting systems for the use of working time (and it takes up to 20% of the working time to fill out all the forms of employees), and to top it all off, hardware: locks, barriers, fingerprint identifiers and similar security equipment. However, previous experience shows that while there is a guerrilla war between an employee and a corporation, the employee will always be the winner, and it is unlikely that the advent of modern technical means can radically change the balance of power.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://allbest.ru

Introduction

Imitation of activity (ID) is a behavioral stereotype consisting of numerous empty actions aimed solely at justifying inaction, and not at achieving the goal.

Why imitate work?

It would seem that there is something incomprehensible? A person imitates violent activity in order to receive wages, while not straining. This is partly true. However, it is also worth thinking about the fact that posing as a Stakhanovite and creating the image of a constantly busy worker, an employee spends a lot of energy and strength that he could direct to the implementation of the tasks that were set for him.

The purpose of imitation of activity is to show the importance and necessity of the work done, and in particular the gigantic volume of this very work done.

The main driving force in imitation of activity is the ineradicable belief that sooner or later the authorities will notice the hero and increase the salary / pay a bonus / promote or otherwise encourage the employee. However, knowledge of this fact in no way stops the adherent of imitation of activity, but only inspires him with the idea that "more and better work should have been done."

1. Types of simulators

In almost every team you can meet representatives of this category of employees. Often, colleagues take such people for workaholics, sincerely dedicated to their work. Although imitators have similar goals, they can be divided into several types according to their behavior, while the main characteristic - the absence of real work results - will be inherent in all types.

A) Processor.

Such an employee is constantly busy, and exclusively with his work. He carefully studies every little thing, draws up plans, projects, writes letters, coordinates tasks, and considers possible options. He can talk for a long time about what and how to do it and why it is impossible to do it now. All energy and time are spent on theoretical calculations, but all efforts, conversations and mental assault do not bring results.

Employees of this type masterfully imitate the highest level of competence and manage to sow disbelief at all levels in the ability to change anything. The company's management is forced to put up with chronic "impossibility" and slowly begins to believe that this is really impossible.

Often these people create an aura of indispensable for themselves, and it is very difficult for the manager to believe in the unproductive work of such a “specialist”. But if a practitioner (who is often incapable of reasoning as smoothly as his predecessor) takes the place of the imitator theorist and does what has not been possible for many years, then the essence of the imitator will become obvious.

How to identify a process simulator?

The employee knows what he is doing. He constantly offers new and new options, plans for improvement and improvement of the process he is engaged in. Talks often and at length about the problems that hinder the achievement of results. But, despite all the "efforts", chronically does not achieve results.

B) intriguer.

A representative of this type is a good communicator, constantly communicating with all key employees of the company. He is not interested in the results of his work. The main goal is to achieve maximum own influence within the company, to be always in sight of the authorities. The schemer needs personal power. As a result of the activities of the imitator-schemer, some of the employees sincerely believe in his good intentions. The other part, which understands the true state of affairs, is unable to resist it. The intriguer is "covered" from all sides with very correct words and the trust of the leadership. His behavior provokes scandals, revelations, personnel changes and so on. As a result, really functional people begin to leave the company, which leads to negative consequences for the team as a whole.

How to Diagnose a Schemer Mimic?

Double standards always apply to such a person. Such people are demonstratively loyal and do not talk about what really is, but about how it should be. They gather plankton and non-functional around them, and functional employees, on the contrary, avoid such companies.

B) Truth seeker.

The main feature of this type of imitators is high emotionality and demonstrativeness. They "cheer for the cause with all their hearts." They consider themselves the keepers of corporate traditions. Only they know what is right. They see all the shortcomings, loudly voice them and fiercely fight them. The well-known proverb describes these people best: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

The result of their activities is the constant distraction of colleagues and leaders from business. It is very important for them to prove themselves at every particular moment, but in fact they don’t give a damn about the matter. The business and interests of the company are just an excuse for self-expression. Unlike the intriguer, the truth-seeker imitator most often does not pursue any specific egoistic goals. His job is to be the center of attention.

How to identify a truth-seeking imitator?

Increased emotionality when discussing problems and any working moments. A high degree of emotional response to problems and the inability to restrain oneself. Concentration on finding flaws and criticism to the detriment of finding solutions and achieving results.

2. Causes of activity imitation

Let's look at some reasons:

Imitation from laziness - the employee simply does not want to work

The salary of an employee does not depend on how well or poorly, productively or unproductively he performs his duties. Therefore, there is no particular point in being zealous.

Lack of enough work

The issue of prestige to have a personal secretary, a separate accountant and a personal consultant, forces to hire employees who are superfluous for the production process, who have to imitate labor enthusiasm. They simply have nothing else to do, because others are busy with useful work, and they don’t want to lose their place. The employee cannot satisfy his ambitions and be realized in work. This leads to a depressing feeling of discomfort, which provokes the employee to imitate activities and subsequent departure from the company.

Lack of trust in subordinates on the part of the manager

Even if you promote trust as an element of the company's corporate culture, but at the same time treat your subordinates as thieves and deceivers, employees will get tired of proving the opposite and will really start to steal and deceive. And it's easier to start by stealing working time, imitating the performance of your work.

The work of the employee is not adequately evaluated

Without receiving feedback from management about their work, many people think about their importance and try to stand out in any way: from convulsive improvement in the quality of work to sabotage (you don’t notice, okay, I’ll pretend to work).

· Fatigue

Another reason why a person pretends more than works may be that he is simply tired. Send him on vacation. Often this helps.

3. Signs of imitation of violent activity

Signs of imitation activities include:

1. Exorbitant fuss. You have never seen an employee at rest. If he is heading somewhere, he either moves quickly or even runs.

2. Excessive activity. The person speaks quickly, gushes with ideas, fusses, gives advice to colleagues left and right, shows complete awareness of everything that happens in the company.

3. The employee's workplace is either a uniform mess or a strangely organized system. On the one hand, a lot of papers are scattered on the table, in which the employee tirelessly rummages. On the other hand, the computer monitor is a little less than completely plastered with colored stickers that list upcoming tasks. This makes the workplace more solid. It can be seen with the naked eye: a person is all in business. There is no time to even clean up the table.

4. A person always looks very tired, irritated. His slightly sloppy appearance will eloquently tell you that the employee has absolutely no time to take care of his appearance, as he is completely absorbed in work.

5. An employee can look at the monitor with a thoughtful look for half a day, but as soon as the boss passes nearby, he convulsively begins to minimize the browser windows.

6. A person comes to work ahead of time, and leaves the very last.

7. An employee almost always takes work home, leaving the office with an impressive pile of papers.

8. The employee does his best to let his colleagues know that he works even after hours: he asks professional questions at night, on weekends and on holidays, thereby making it clear that 8 hours of work is not the limit for him.

Naturally, all of the above signs can give out not only an imitator, but also a real workaholic who really works day and night. However, the described behavior of the workaholic is accompanied by more than specific professional achievements.

In addition, if you really ask a working person in the sweat of his face what he is doing right now, he will answer more than specifically. The one who only imitates vigorous activity, despite apparent diligence, cannot boast of outstanding labor indicators, and answers the question about current work vaguely, tries to change the subject or shift attention to other issues.

4. Methods for dealing with imitators in your team

If you find that one or more of your employees are faking a flurry of activity, you have a few options. The first thing you want to do is, of course, deal with the loafer, fine or even fire him. This is one of the more obvious options. However, is it worth it? Try to analyze how useful an employee is to your company. Also remember if this behavior has always characterized him.

If, from the day he joined the company, a person did nothing but fuss, and there are not so many real successes in his work, you can think about dismissal. Call an employee for a chat. Give him a list of his real merits and compare with the number of tasks assigned. Find out why your orders are not being fulfilled and give 2-3 months to correct the situation. If nothing changes at the end of this period, fire. impersonator motivation head schemer

If the situation is such that initially a promising and talented employee came to work for you, ready to work and develop, and after some time the enthusiasm subsided, you will have to find out what is the reason for such a decline. Perhaps the employee is dissatisfied with the working conditions, poorly motivated, or not provided with the required amount of work. A frank conversation will certainly help resolve differences and restore the person's confidence that his work is appreciated. And if this conversation is reinforced by actions on your part aimed at improving conditions, you will soon again receive a loyal employee who shows high results.

1. Don't forget to motivate employees.

2. Clearly define the scope of authority for each employee.

3. Clearly formulate the goals, objectives, results and deadlines for the implementation of a particular task. Also, do not forget to mention what reward awaits the employee if he successfully copes (bonus, promotion, etc.)

4. Do not leave the success of employees without attention. Encourage them.

5. Formulate the tasks and deadlines for the completion of work in writing (by e-mail or in Internet messengers.) This will eliminate such reasons for not fulfilling your assignment as “I forgot” or “you didn’t say”.

6. Be interested in the affairs and current mood of subordinates. This will allow you to respond to their needs in a timely manner.

7. Monitor the execution of your orders. Arrange periodic summing up of the work of departments and each individual employee. But don't overdo the reporting. If, instead of working, an employee is forced to fill out lengthy reports every day, this will lead him to think that you do not trust him. In addition, excessive documentation has not yet made anyone happy.

In general, if the imitation of violent activity has become a general phenomenon in your organization, then it's time to reconsider your views on personnel policy and enterprise management.

5. 9 Rules of the Workplace Simulator

1. Never walk without a document in your hands.

People with documents in their hands look like the hardest working employees. Empty-handed people look like they're going to cafes or hanging around doing nothing. In addition, be sure to take the documents home for the night, thus creating the impression that you work more than you actually do.

2. Use your computer to look busy.

Sitting down at the computer, lament about the malfunction or inconvenience of (new) software - it looks like "work" to the casual observer. At the same time, you can do anything, even remotely not related to work activities. If you get caught by the boss - and he will definitely catch you - your best defense is to declare that you are learning new software / manual, and thus save money that would have to be spent on your training.

3. A mess on the table.

The order on the table looks like we're not working hard enough. Build piles of documents at your workplace. To the observer, last year's work looks the same as the current one, only the volume matters. Heap them wide and high, and so that they stick out in all directions. If someone should come to you, bury the document you need in the middle of the pile, and look for it diligently only during the visitor's visit.

4. Answering machine.

Never answer phone calls if you have an answering machine. People don't call you to give you something for nothing, but to get YOU to do work for THEM. Pass all calls through the answering machine. If someone leaves a message for you and it threatens to work, reply to it during your lunch break when you know the person is out - this gives the impression of being very responsible and conscientious.

5. Look nervous and irritated.

It is necessary to try to constantly look nervous and annoyed, so that the bosses get the impression that you are busy all the time.

6. Leave work late.

Always leave work late, especially if the boss is still there. You can read magazines and books that you never have time for at home. Make sure your path to the exit is past the boss's door. Send important messages after business hours (9:35 PM, 7:05 AM, etc.) and during public holidays.

7. Creative sigh.

Sigh loudly when there are a lot of people around to give the impression that you are under terrible pressure.

8. Legendary man.

It is not enough to pile a bunch of documents on the table. Place more books on the floor. Thick manuals, encyclopedias and serious periodicals are best suited - this is how a legend will develop about you as a professional with encyclopedic knowledge and following all the latest in your industry.

9. Building a dictionary.

Look through a couple of serious magazines in your specialty and memorize smart concepts. Use them freely in conversations with bosses. Remember: it is not necessary to be understood, the main thing is that it will sound impressive!

Conclusion

There are several constructive ways to control hardened imitators.

You will have to show extraordinary flair and psychological subtlety in order to convict the cunning. But - attention! - do not slide into total suspicion and surveillance: this is a feature of tyrants.

Do not leave subordinates alone for a long time - your weekly absences on business trips will inevitably affect the overall results of work. Alas, most people are lazy and weak. They are simply reluctant to work, so you, by virtue of your position, will have to spur them on.

In case of your absence, appoint a substitute in whom you are confident. He should be one of those privates who dreams of becoming a general, not prone to familiarity with colleagues and not wanting to hide their "exploits" from you.

If you yourself are absent from work on personal matters, do not advertise this! Such behavior betrays disdain for subordinates.

When giving employees a task, formulate the task clearly and indicate specific deadlines, for example: “View the archive for the past year and report tomorrow what documents it lacks.”

Allow you to go home early if the job is done.

Praise people and reward good work with bonuses. Then they have an incentive to work hard

Imitation of work can only bring tangible losses to modern companies, both global giants and regional firms. All organizations have something in common - their employees are very busy with anything but working for the enterprise that pays them a salary. Say what you like, but the company, and even the state, lose money every minute that an employee spends on himself during working hours.

Bibliography

1. Odegov Yu.G. Zhuravlev P.V. Personnel management: Textbook for universities. - M.: Finstatinform, 2007.

2. Meskon M.Kh., Albert M., Hedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Per. from English-M.: "Delo", 2002.

3. Kruglov M.I. Company management. - M.: Delovaya Literature, 2002. - 758 p.

4. Utkin E.A. Management course. M.: Zertsalo, 2002.- 340 p.

5. Parkinson S. Art of management. - M., 2000.

6. Siegert W., Lang L. Lead without conflict. - M., 2010.

7. Drucker P. Effective manager. - M., 2004.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

Carrying out an assessment of the effectiveness of the activities of the head in Japanese, American and Western European companies. Types and styles of management. Analysis of the leader's personality from the professional and psychological side. Improving the work of superiors.

term paper, added 04/21/2015


The behavior of the chief in case of a shortage of employees in the department in a tense atmosphere and failure to meet deadlines. Determining the cause of the conflict in the case of nit-picking by the leader to the subordinate in response to criticism from his side, voiced at the meeting.

task, added 09/10/2011


Theoretical aspects of the stress state, its main types, causes and provoking factors. Methods of dealing with stress in the work of the head. The main ways to overcome the crisis of emotional states. Minimize the effect of stress on the body.

term paper, added 09/20/2011


The goals of studying the motivation of labor behavior in modern management theory. The main types of employee motivation in the conditions of the formation of market relations in Russia. Problems of assessing the performance of employees and building a remuneration system.

term paper, added 11/15/2010


Fundamentals of motivation and stimulation of human activity: types, methods, forms of stimulation of labor activity. Procedural and content theories of motivation, their practical application. Evaluation of the work of the head and remuneration of the employee.

control work, added 04/01/2011


Theoretical aspects of the motivation of the personnel in the enterprise. Brief organizational and economic characteristics and assessment of the current system of labor motivation in OOO Firma DIKO. Improving the system of personnel motivation at the enterprise.

thesis, added 10/28/2010


The level of staff motivation and the effectiveness of the current motivation system. Evaluation of the activities of the team. Commitment of employees of the company and the team. Improving mutual understanding between managers and employees of the enterprise. Development of a map of motivators.

abstract, added 12/20/2010


The path to effective human management. Definition and formation of motives of behavior. Characteristics of theories of labor motivation. Systems, forms, methods and types of labor motivation of personnel, methods and methods of their use. Evaluation of the effectiveness of motivation.

control work, added 06/02/2009


The essence of staff motivation and stimulation is the process of encouraging all employees of the team to be active in order to meet their needs and achieve the goals of the organization. The labor market and its subjects as a form of employee motivation.

term paper, added 01/11/2011


Process theories of motivation. Types of motives for work. The main forms of motivation elements: by results and by status. Basic concepts and techniques of gamification, history and scope of its application. Motivating functions of wages. The basic principle of gamification.