Plans, Standards and Tasks. Is it really required to set them?

Sometimes it is said that: "Maybe it is not required to set tasks, evaluations, standards? Any plan, - shall say a director having many free-loaders on his arms, - is a threshold, and its absence – gives unlimited possibilities. If a person wants to work more, then why would he require a standard?"

Actually the director does not have a choice – whether to set up an evaluation and plans or not. A standard as an image. Whether the person is careful or not – he still has an image. It is just that in the second case, it is worse than in the first one. An absence of standards can also not exist. It’s another matter as to who sets them and for whom. The employees for the director or the director for the employees.

For example, it is enough for a weak manager to get an income of 1000 $ in a month (in such a way so as not to strain himself, and yet, according to him, "live normally"). Let’s suppose that it covers 5 % (as a reward) from the volume of sales. If there are 5 managers, it is easy to calculate that the turnover of the company (set by the employees of this enterprise) will be of 100 000 $. We can discuss about the "thresholds" and about the "unlimited possibilities" for ever, but this discussion would be useless. The standards have already been set for the enterprise.

And also. A plan is the threshold for a specific system. If you want more, create another system. Thus, a pole with a specific structure (which "gives the threshold") guarantees, even the average jumper, a height 2,5 times the height that a great jumper would without a pole, yet believing in his "unlimited possibilities".

You want to fly higher – let go of the pole and construct a plane. It will also have a "threshold”, but the one with a plane can talk as much as he wants about the "absence of limits”
- his destiny is to crawl (maximum, leap), but not fly.

Let’s discuss this in more details. Follow the links given below.