Chapter 4 do the right thing and do the right thing

Henry Duherty, who founded a nationwide agency, says that no matter how much he pays, it's impossible to find a person who has both abilities.These two abilities are: first, being able to think; second, being able to act according to the importance of things. At work, if we cannot choose the right thing to do, the only right thing to do is to stop what we are doing until we find the right thing.It can be seen that the directionality of doing things is very important.However, in real life, whether it is the business behavior of an enterprise or the working method of an individual, people often focus on the former: efficiency and doing things right.

In fact, the first thing that matters is effectiveness rather than efficiency, doing the right thing rather than doing the right thing. "Doing things right" emphasizes efficiency, and the result is to make us move towards our goals faster; "Doing the right thing" emphasizes efficiency, and the result is to ensure that our work is firmly moving towards our goals step forward. In other words, efficiency is concerned with the best way to do a job, and effectiveness is concerned with the best use of time—which includes doing or not doing a certain job. "Doing things right" is based on the premise of "doing the right thing". Without such a premise, "doing things right" will become meaningless.Do the right thing first, then do it right.Doing things correctly, but more importantly, doing the right thing is not only an important working method, but also a very important working philosophy.At any time, for any person or organization, "doing the right thing" is far more important than "doing the right thing".

Doing things right and doing the right thing are two very different ways of working.Doing things right is a routine, regardless of whether the goal is achieved. It is a passive and mechanical way of working.The job is only responsible to the boss, responsible for the process, do whatever the leader asks, blindly obey, monolithic, a slave to the system, and a passive working state.People who work in this state often don't think about progress, worry about gains and losses, don't seek merit, but seek no faults, and live as a monk against the clock all day. Doing the right thing not only focuses on procedures, but also on goals. It is an active and dynamic way of working.The work is responsible for the goal, has his own ideas in doing things, and is good at working creatively.This kind of person is proactive, can closely focus on the company's goals in the work, give full play to the human initiative in order to achieve the company's goals, make changes within the scope allowed by the system, and strive to promote the realization of the goals.

The fundamental difference between these two working methods lies in: whether they are only responsible for the process, or both the process and the result; whether they are waiting for work or actively working.At the same time, the difference between these two different ways of working is huge. Let me give you an example at work. For example, a customer service personnel received a service order, and the customer wanted to install a printer, but the service form did not indicate whether a plug-in cable was required. At this time, the customer service personnel had 3 Ways: The first method: follow the dispatch work order;

The second method: call to remind the business secretary whether to have a plug-in cable, and then wait for the other party to reply; The third method: call the customer directly and ask if you want to match the patch cord, if necessary, send it to the customer. The first method may cause the customer’s printer to be unusable and cause customer dissatisfaction; the second method may delay the work speed and affect the service quality; the third method can avoid work mistakes without affecting work efficiency . What do you think is the best approach?I believe most people will choose the third approach.The third approach is to do the right thing. The first and second approaches are to do the right thing. The difference between the two lies in the different results. The reason is that the company's goals are not combined with their own work.

If you want to focus on the most urgent tasks, you have to get rid of the entanglements of secondary things. At this time, you need to have the courage to say "no". My wife had been elected chairperson of the community planning committee, but she had to accept reluctantly because she couldn't let go of many more important things and was too embarrassed to say no.When she later called a close friend and asked if she would like to serve on the committee, she declined, and my wife, disappointed, said, "I wish I could say no then." This is not to say that community activities or social services are not important, but that everyone has aspirations and priorities.When necessary, you should reject others without being humble or overbearing, and know the trade-off between urgency and importance.When I was teaching at a very large university, I hired an extremely talented and independent copywriter.One day, I wanted to ask him for an urgent matter.He said: "I can do whatever you want, but please understand the current situation first." He pointed to the work schedule on the wall, which showed that more than 20 projects were in progress, all of which we had already negotiated.

Then he said, "This is going to take at least a few days, which project would you like me to drop or cancel to free up time?" He's a top-notch worker, which is why I turn to him for urgent matters.But I can't ask him to put down the work at hand, because in comparison, the ongoing plan is more important, so I have to ask someone else. My training sessions put a lot of emphasis on prioritizing and following through.I often ask my trainees: What are your weaknesses: (1) Can't tell whether something is important or not? (2) Inability or unwillingness to act methodically?

(3) Lack of self-control to adhere to the above principles? The answer is probably a lack of self-control, but I don't think so.In my opinion, it is because the effort of "establishing goals" is not enough.And if you can't sincerely accept the concept of "priority and urgency", it is easy to give up halfway.Such people are very common.They can focus and have enough self-control, but they don't live by principles and lack a personal mission statement.Lacking proper guidance, they do not know exactly where they came from. Focusing on spouse or money, friends, pleasure, etc., it is easy to be fettered by the first and third types of affairs.As for the self-centered people, they will inevitably be misled by emotional impulses, indulging in the third type of activities that can win people's favor, and the fourth type of affairs that can escape reality.These temptations are often not overcome by independent will. Only sincere beliefs and goals can generate the courage to say "no".