The attitudes of the people within organisations defines what they are and the services or products that they produce. The type of people within the organisation makes the difference between an average business or a successful business.
Therefore I find it a big irony that in some companies, employees are told that they are replaceable. Doesn't that create a conflict? People defines the organisation and yet replaceable?
Personally, I believe that defined business processes and procedures can only ensure that your business will continue to function when people go. However the people are the differentiating factor. Can rules and processes ignite passion for the job? Can they teach a person to be versatile and adapt to different situations?
Some bosses here use this excuse that people are replaceable to overwork their current employees. With high mortgages and cost of living, normal employees can do little to fight back. Not all businesses treat their workers fairly becase there are no rules or laws to govern this area.
Today there was an article talking about wages in Singapore. Frankly, just look the level of domestic consumption here by Singapore citizens and you will know whether we are increasingly being priced out of our own country. Countries around the world have learned from the crisis and are taking steps to increase the domestic consumption level.
Will Singapore learn that it's the citizens that define what Singapore is?
4 comments:
it's very tiring to keep adapting to changes..
I am studying Organization Behaviour & Management. What is on the book and the real life is so different. Think everyone need to go for some trainings before being employed?
It doesn't matter because it's a fact that what's on the books and what's real life will always be different because situations change.
Life changes too. What is applicable when the book is written becomes irrelevant when it's published.
I usually treat what's written in books as guidelines.
big thanks to the author for new)
Post a Comment