Chapter 60 Properly Coordinating Differences of Leaders' Opinions

Work is not a child's play, and there must be no delay.However, there are many answers to some questions. There is no one who is right and who is wrong. Consensus can only be formed after the results come out. Differences among leaders can easily affect the work process.Therefore, it is imperative to coordinate the differences between leaders. Properly handling the differences between many leaders in the workplace is an issue that deserves our attention.The leader we are facing is not just an individual, but a group. We must listen to every leader's words and implement every leader's instructions.If the opinions of the leaders are consistent, there is generally no problem in implementing them.However, it is not uncommon for leaders to have different academic experiences, personalities and temperaments, and to observe problems from different perspectives. It is not uncommon for leaders to disagree with each other or even contradict each other. In such cases, subordinates should handle them properly.There are several ways to deal with non-principled differences in leadership opinions:

First of all, according to "chronological order" to deal with.That is to say, whichever leader speaks first will act according to the leader's opinion.In fact, this is implemented without waiting for different opinions to be expressed, which can avoid the suspicion of listening to someone's words and not listening to others' words. Secondly, according to the "level of position" to deal with.That is to say, whoever has a higher position will listen to him.Although the leader with a low rank is unhappy, he can't blame you completely, and even if he has an opinion, he can't put it on the table.

Again, according to the "effective size" to deal with.That is to say, which leader's opinion you think is more practical and effective, you can follow the opinion of the leader, and explain your understanding to the leader who holds different opinions. Finally, according to "both left and right" to deal with.That is to say, on the premise of not violating the general principle, try to take into account the opinions of different leaders. When a unit was renovating the camp, two main leaders disagreed on how to repair the drainage ditch: one asked to build an open ditch, thinking it would save money; the other asked to build a dark ditch, thinking it was so beautiful.The opinions of the two leaders are reasonable, and they will not give in to each other, and the functional departments of the government must act according to their own opinions.The cadres in charge of the construction came up with a compromise plan. Half of the road beside the camp was built as a hidden ditch, and the unnoticed half behind the house was built as an open ditch.Without offending a certain leader, the task was completed.

The above methods are all feasible, and in some cases, I am afraid that this is the only way to do it.Because when the opinions of the leaders are unified, it will probably be a long time ago.After all, work is not a child's play, and there must be no delay.And some questions already have multiple answers, no one is right and who is wrong, and consensus can often only be formed after the results come out.Of course, these methods have their own advantages and disadvantages, and cannot be said to be the best method. Everything remains the same.If you study further, there are actually some relatively smarter solutions.Subordinates undertake work, and strive to think before the leader, not only predict how the work itself should be done, fully prepare plans and suggestions, and strive to make it in line with the objective reality, but also predict which links are not easy to unify, and the leaders may have different opinions on the matter. If you have any ideas, take these factors into consideration in the plan, and properly take care of and reflect them.If there is no consideration and reflection, once they raise it, how to explain it, to persuade them to give up this part of the opinion, so that they can follow the plan you proposed.The advantage of this method is that it can avoid conflicts, which is beneficial to work, and as time goes by, it is conducive to bridging the differences between leaders and making leaders have a sense of trust in you.The difficulty is that you must fully understand leadership, be familiar with the work, have extraordinary vision and the ability to coordinate relationships.

Sometimes before you can think of a solution, the leader will explain his intentions. One says to do this, and the other says to do that, making you in a dilemma.In this case, if the matter is not very urgent, it can be put aside for a while.When the leader asks about it afterwards, he can explain it on an appropriate occasion and timing: First, this matter has little effect on promoting the construction of the unit, or the time is not yet ripe, so it should be postponed appropriately; It is difficult to implement it, and I sincerely hope that the leadership deployment work will be as consistent as possible, so as to facilitate the development of work and unit construction.

We should have the spirit of taking responsibility.As long as there is no harm to the construction of the unit, the subordinates should have the courage to take responsibility and the spirit of not being afraid of misunderstandings by the leaders, then our work will go on smoothly.