Why are leaders parachuted in and not promoted from within? The reason behind it is too thick and black!
Whenever there is a change of company or department, the selection of a new leader is always in the spotlight.
Everyone is struggling to guess, who will be the "chosen son" this time?
Is internal A, B, and C most likely?
External airborne is also uncertain.
When it was finally announced that Outside X would be at the helm, there was another uproar.
Why do leaders always love to be airborne, why is it so difficult to promote internally?
This can't help but make people think.
The reason behind it seems to be more "thick and black" than you think.
A common explanation is that external airborne is more specialized.
Leadership positions require a more comprehensive vision and experience, and the internal talent pool is limited, so it is better to bring in the right people from the outside.
This makes sense, but it can't help but think that the internal employees are too unlevel.
After working silently for many years, he knows the business and the team well, and this kind of familiarity with the internal environment is difficult to compare with no matter how strong the airborne is.
It is even said that it is easier for airborne leaders to convince the public.
Internal promotion will inevitably make a big splash and easily offend people.
Airborne to get rid of the burden of history, everyone is not offended, and it is more neutral.
But the problem is that when you first arrive, everything starts from scratch, and it takes more time and energy to run in.
If a huddle had already been formed internally, it would be difficult to convince the public no matter how strong the airborne landing was.
There is a conspiracy theory that the top brass prefers to parachute in order to nurture their own cronies.
Internal promotion is not related to the family, and it may not be easy to control.
Airborne leaders, on the contrary, are more loyal because of their high dependence.
This kind of thinking cannot be said to be absent, but it is also not possible to generalize.
Leaders are also ordinary people, and not everyone may be in a small circle.
There is also a perspective that internal interpersonal relationships are intertwined and it is not easy to promote.
It is inevitable that there will be undercurrents between the levels, and they will not accept each other.
Long-term cooperation, the inferior roots of human nature can be seen clearly.
"Those who are close to Zhu are red, and those who are close to ink are black", and everyone who is promoted seems to have flaws.
It's better to parachute a relatively clean one, and it can also reshuffle the team.
However, airborne is also risky.
One is that the water and soil are not adapted, and they cannot be integrated.
Differences in culture, philosophy, and style cannot be changed overnight.
Airborne people don't understand the unspoken rules of the interior, and they can easily become the target of public criticism.
Second, there is a lack of foundation, and it is difficult to produce performance.
I don't know about internal factors such as team, business, and customers, so I learned everything from scratch.
Often, if you put a lot of effort into it, you can only stand still, and it is difficult to inherit the achievements of the predecessors.
More hidden, it is the consideration of the superior employer.
First, internal promotion is easy to form parties for personal gain, which affects the fairness of employment.
The chief officer brought his cronies to the throne, and it was easy to become a new hill.
Second, the airborne leaders are responsible for their superiors and can better carry out the intentions of their superiors.
Those promoted at the grassroots level may be more downward, and the instructions of the higher authorities will inevitably be discounted.
Isn't that supposed to be brainless about airborne?
Non-ya.
The proper combination of inside and outside is the best state.
The key is to break the seniority of seniority and meritocracy.
Let those who "want to rise" and "can rise", regardless of whether they are inside or outside, have a stage of fair competition.
At the same time, a sound mechanism for selecting and employing people has been introduced, and black-box operations have been eliminated from all aspects of training, selection, and appointment.
In short, it doesn't matter if it's promoted internally or airborne externally.
We can't dogmatically either/or, but we should discuss one thing at a time, and adapt it to each event.
Select the best and use it at the right time.
Partial listening and cronyism are the taboos on the road of employing people.
What do you think about the leadership of the airborne? Have you experienced internal and external shifts?
Feel free to share your stories and opinions in the comment section, but remember to be more rational and objective, and less emotional.