Readers often complain to me that it seems that anyone in the unit can assign him a job. And with so many things piled up together, he must be too busy, but he doesn't know how to refuse. Here, I will explain three common task management problems, namely "how to deal with the tasks assigned to you by non-direct leaders", "how to deal with the opinions given to you by colleagues", and "how to deal with the additional tasks assigned to you by customers".
The non-direct leader asked me to do things for him,
How to pick up
For the first type of problem, you may think that it is normal to help non-direct leaders do something. But I want to take you to a real-life workplace and experience the dilemma that a reader encounters.
The reader's immediate supervisor is a deputy in the department. Once, the head of the department asked him to go to the city for a meeting. But as soon as he arrived at the meeting, he received a call from his direct leader, asking him to hand in a work material in the afternoon.
The reader was embarrassed and said, "The big leader asked me to come to the city for a meeting, and I'm not in the unit now." After hearing this, the other party immediately asked: "Why didn't you tell me in advance that you were going to a meeting?
This reader muttered in his heart: The big leader is also your leader, and he arranged for me to go, can I not go? But in turn, he thought: The reaction of the direct leader is not unreasonable, and I can't say, "You'd better ask me if I work for the big leader before sending out work," right?
At first glance, this pit cannot be bypassed, and this reader is about to "not be a person inside and out". Actually, if you're like this reader, you're receiving two or more tasks at the same time, you can balance your work according to the following communication methods.
You can first respond to the big leader who "overstepped the command": "Roger." I'll immediately sort out the work at hand, reorganize the work schedule for the afternoon, and synchronize the information with you in 5 minutes. Then he trotted to his immediate superior: "I'll report something to you." Just now×× leader asked me to go to the city for a meeting in the afternoon, but I originally had ×× work this afternoon, and if I went to the meeting, my work progress might be delayed. I'm a little unsure of what to arrange, I want to ask you how to arrange my afternoon work?"
In terms of attitude, you reported the matter to your immediate supervisor as soon as possible and showed respect to him. In terms of method, if you ask your immediate supervisor to help him make suggestions, it is equivalent to passing the ball to his feet -- to go to a meeting, or not to go? After you go, what will happen to the original work; if you don't go, how should you explain to the big leader? In this way, these are not your own business, but the two of you have to face together.
In any case, the previous situation of "you didn't do the work arranged by your direct supervisor, so he is very dissatisfied with you" will definitely not happen, because what you want to do is determined by him.
Therefore, no matter when, no matter who assigns you a job, you should keep up with your direct supervisor in a timely manner. This is called the united front method. To get the most out of it, you just have to remember two key moves.
First, respond positively, but without commitment.
Even if the person who assigns you the task is not a leader, there is a high probability that he is a senior in the unit. We have to be popular, don't come up and say you can't do it, you have to give the other party the respect and politeness they deserve.
But politeness and respect don't mean you have to say yes. After all, whether you can do this job or not, you don't count if you say it yourself. While expressing a positive attitude, the response without over-committing is something like this: "Roger. I'll go back and arrange the work at hand right away and get back to you later. ”
Second, synchronize the direct leadership and ask for advice.
Looking back at the reader who was criticized earlier, do you think that his direct supervisor is unhappy, is it really because the materials to be handed in cannot be passed on without him? Probably not. What my superiors asked was: As a subordinate, why did you make decisions without my consent?
If the immediate leader says "yes", then the matter is simple. When you go back, you just need to arrange the work at hand and do the work for the big leader first. But if your immediate supervisor thinks your job is more important and asks you not to go, you can also ask him to help with an idea: "Do you think it's more appropriate for you to reply (the big leader) or for me to reply?"
Be careful, in this case, he can help you get rid of things you shouldn't have done.
Anyone can give me advice on my plan.
What to do
At work, you also run into a type of dilemma: everyone comes to you for advice, but you don't know who to listen to or how to move forward.
The person giving the opinion is just expressing his opinion and will not take responsibility for you. Moreover, I must point out a typical mistake that I learned in this scenario: to take the words of the big leader and press others in order to save trouble.
I offer a solution to the problem. You need to take the initiative to build an environment where people can speak one at a time.
I call this method the field method, and the key step is two-step. The first step is to collect opinions in a specific, public field. In the past, you were reactive to other people's opinions, but not anymore – you can organize a meeting and bring in all the colleagues you can think of who are relevant to it, and let people share their ideas together. You can also create a new project group outside of your day-to-day work group, bring relevant colleagues in, and discuss the plan with everyone in the group.
In many cases, colleagues say different things, but they mean the same thing. In the past, you felt that you couldn't cope with it, because everyone talked about it sentence by sentence, and when the opinions came to you, they all "exploded". But now, if everybody were to discuss in a predetermined field, they might follow up on what someone else had to say, "Yes, I'm basically the same as ×××, I only have one thing to add......"
Creating a field is actually restricting the thinking and mentality of colleagues to put forward opinions. To put it bluntly, everyone is in a meeting or group, and they are all dealing with the same thing, so they can't look at each other?
It's much more efficient than giving your opinion one by one in private. Because everyone is in a fixed field, they will look at each other and avoid repetitive opinions.
The second step is to promote the new plan in a specific and public field.
Even if you take the initiative and revise the plan based on the feedback you gather, it is unlikely that this version of the plan will pass in one round. So, be prepared to double-check, tell yourself that this is likely to be a protracted battle, and then discuss new options with everyone.
You can post the new proposal to the program, or you can continue to report on the proposal in a meeting format, such as saying, "This is a new proposal that has been revised based on the last comments from the leaders." Please note that ×× has made major adjustments based on your opinions. I would like to take a moment of time for you to give a 20-minute presentation. ”
Seeing this, you should understand that the field method is nothing more than repeating two steps until the plan is completely finalized. And the biggest advantage of it is that the process of the task is completely in your own hands, and it is up to you to decide when to convene everyone for discussion and when to report on new plans.
When you can manage and aggregate everyone's opinions, you won't have to suffer the loss of endless changes.
The client assigned me extra work,
What to do
The previous discussion is all about the situation within the organization, but you may be tempted to say that it is not only the leaders who send me work and provide advice, but also the customers.
Dealing with these kinds of issues seems to be much trickier. If you refuse outright, you may offend the customer, but if you say yes, not only will the workload increase dramatically, but if you can't do it, the customer will feel that you are playing tricks on him, and the customer will be even more angry. And at this time, when you complain to the leader, the leader is not clear about the outline of the previous situation, and the reply is often "customer service as a priority", and it is difficult for you to get support from him.
But don't worry, this problem is not unsolvable, and even its solution is somewhat similar to the one mentioned earlier. Let's take the example of "the client wants you to work for him during non-working hours" to talk about how you cope.
You can reply to the customer first: "Mr. Wang, I understand that you want us to provide you with personnel support and technical assistance on Saturdays and Sundays as well as on weekdays." We fully understand that I will escalate your ideas to the leadership right now, and we will discuss internally how the support can better complement your work. I'll get back to you in 24 hours, okay?"
After you have expressed your attitude to the customer, you should go to the leader, but instead of complaining to him, you will say, "Leader, I will report something to you." Mr. Wang hopes that we can also provide normal resource support on weekends. I quickly made a service plan and analyzed it. If we agree, there may be ×× costs, and if we refuse, there may be ×× risks. How do you think it's appropriate for us to respond to customers?"
Here, we're using the consensus reply method. You should already be aware of the similarities between it and the United Front Law: we should respond positively, but not committedly. This will buy you some time and give you the opportunity to coordinate within the organization, thus freeing yourself from the "sandwich cookie" situation between the client and the organization.
In addition to this, there are two technical details of the consensus response method.
First, the leader makes a decision, and the plan talks about the pros and cons.
You may have doubts about this: the client assigns extra tasks, and sometimes you grit your teeth and stomp your feet, but you can still follow up. Why do you have to escalate to your boss and let him make the decision?
This is because the employee is hired by the company, not the customer, and his time and energy are actually the company's resources.
In other words, it's not up to you to decide whether or not to spend time and effort on meeting the extra needs of your customers. As the person who stands between the company and the customer, it is a truly professional approach to let the leader weigh the pros and cons and make decisions from the overall situation.
Second, you need to agree with your leader on how to respond.
After the leader makes a decision, if you are told that you can meet the customer's needs, then you only need to confirm with the leader what you want to reply to the customer.
If you reply to a client on behalf of your organization, the client will feel that your decision is being made carefully. At the same time, because this is a decision made based on the overall consideration, if there is a problem during the implementation process, you can ask your superiors for support as soon as possible, instead of blindly paying alone.
But if the leader thinks that the customer's needs are unreasonable and can't agree, then you can ask him: "Understood, leader, I also think that the customer's needs are indeed beyond the reasonable range." But this is an old customer, and I will say it alone, and the customer may be difficult to accept. Do you think this is okay, I'll block it first and get back to him. After I'm done, you can go and say a few more words to him, and give him a circle, okay?"
Do you see what this is doing? Turning down a customer's appeal is undoubtedly a difficult task. Therefore, it is best for you to pry your superiors to come forward and let him speak for you and help you solve this problem better.
If the leader is willing to take the last step for you, you create an opportunity for the customer, the leader, and you to communicate with you individually. Although the customer's needs were not met, your relationship may have become stronger because of this communication. In any case, this thing closes the loop at your level.
Author: Take off the flowers. From Reader Magazine, Issue 9, 2024. Those shining days, there are "Readers" to witness with you.