For every business, the fall of income is a real catastrophe. Let us figure out what to do in this situation.
What to Do If the Income Falls
Different leaders react differently to catastrophic situations. The most stupid and weak ones simply show emotional reactions but do not do anything about it. Who is cleverer – act. But these actions are not always competent.
In this article, we want to talk about the right actions at the time of the disaster or its precursors. These actions relate exclusively to leaders who have a staff of subordinates so that they are solely an administrative procedure. We will not give a universal recipe from any catastrophe, we will just tell you, what exactly the leader need to do. And this will be the best example of a competent administrator’s behavior. And regarding universal recipes, probably, we can give you one. Does the abstract on management, marketing or personnel management give you no peace? Entrust this task to professionals from https://essayspark.com/buy-
What Is a Catastrophe?
First, let us define what we mean by catastrophe. A catastrophe is a circumstance or situation that is harmful and can adversely affect the entire organization or some part of it. Low income is a serious threat, which can turn into a catastrophe. If the main indicators of any major part of the organization fall and remain at a low level – this can turn into a catastrophe.
When the indicators of the organization such as “income” change their trend and begin to fall, it means that someone stopped doing something right, or an incorrect, groundless order was given, which was simply someone’s whimsy and was not based on a strategy for improving cases.
Wrong Actions or How to Make Things Worse
There is one correct way to cope with the situation and a lot of wrong ones. The main wrong actions can be counted as three;
The most incorrect thing is that the leader does not take any actions and takes no responsibility for resolving the catastrophic situation. Note, we do not say “pleads guilty” because we do not mean “guilt”, but “responsibility”, which is defined as “the ability to be the cause”;
The second wrong action is to issue an avalanche of orders that are not based on an in-depth study of the situation, and not go beyond. Well, this is a less erroneous action since the leader nevertheless goes to the position of the cause. But this method is super-authoritarian management, which may not lead the organization out of the catastrophe and its consequences. However, this action is better than complete inaction since it is obvious that the rigid authoritarian control systems with the “iron hand” were viable enough. Much more viable than liberal-democraticones, if to read the story;
The third wrong action is democratically-bureaucratic. To convene a meeting, appoint a commission and endlessly investigate the causes of the catastrophe collectively, and then to vote for the decisions and conclusions of this organ. Especially unanimously. Here is as in financial planning: one head is good, and two are ugliness. Since there is a group of responsible people, it means no really responsible person.
These actions are wrong, but common.
You always need to think with your head. For example, if you need to write academic work, and there is neither time nor opportunity, you need to consider all the options and find a way out instead of whining”who can write an essay for me?”.
Imagine an organization in which, as a result of the crisis, income fell. Why did it fall? Because the director heard about the crisis, employees heard about the crisis, suppliers heard about the crisis, customers heard about the crisis. And they all unanimously stopped doing the right actions, reduced efforts to find new customers (which is the first strategy in the crisis), and began to issue baseless chaotic orders, destroying working schemes and creating additional confusion.
Recall a story about a Japanese who not only successfully survived the global crisis of the 60s but also increased his company several times. The journalist asked him how he did it. The Japanese replied: “I am very bad at knowing English. I do not read newspapers, do not watch TV. I did not know about the crisis – just worked”.
How to Deal When Income Falls
In a situation that promises a catastrophe (or is it), do not limit yourself to convulsive reactions or bureaucratic “smearing of white porridge on a clean table”. It is necessary to make three actions consistently:
- The leader needs to instantly issue an urgent, “authoritarian” directive (order), in which to indicate what actions to take to prevent a catastrophe.This directive may be incorrect, but it will not leave the sphere in inaction and irresponsibility. If you doubt – shoot. This principle saved many lives in the war. And if the leader is not quite “wooden”, then most likely his or her directive will be aimed at improving the situation. In any case, whether you have experience and qualifications or not, issue an urgent order and let people act;
- While an urgent directive is acting, gather a commission of the most competent and experienced ones, which will conduct an investigation of the situation and collect all data. This commission operates on the basis of democracy, but it has time for this because the director won the time forthe investigation with the help of an urgent directive. The gathered commission should indeed collect all pertinent data. And when data are collected – to come up with a good plan of action or decision, which is submitted for approval to the director.
It is important to note that the director does not participate in the meetings of this commission so that he or she is not subjected to emotional pressure. Democracy is democracy, and the director is a king. And what does the first director do while the commission is working? He or she personally leads the actions to promote to the market in order to avoid a catastrophe or to reduce its consequences;
- The director approves the conclusions of the commission and the proposed decision. He or she has the right to correct it, but now there is all data obtained as a result of the research, and the opinions of the most competent people.
Thus, a new policy of emerging from the crisis is born.
If this plan does not work, nothing will work since all the intellectual and administrative resources are taken into accounting it.