Transcription
Good day, ladies and gentlemen. Good day, esteemed webinar participants. I am Alexander Friedman, a consultant and business coach. And the topic will be about managing chaos, chaos management, as I call this discipline. Yes, as far as I know, according to the rules, you can ask some questions, apparently, there, yes, in the content. Well, and the audience is also not forbidden to ask anything. What, in fact, is it about. I divide such a discipline, well, such a block of management knowledge, as chaos management, into three parts. One of the questions concerns self-organization. Well, yes, such a banal word, self-organization. Questions about what, in fact, it means, yes, but we will talk about it. The second part. I highlight such a topic as management planning. That is, a leader must be able to plan future events, the participation of subordinates in them, resource allocation, prioritization, everything that many have heard of, but few can truly do, right? There are such topics, you know, that everyone knows, that have gotten on everyone's nerves. The question is always, do we do them or not. Well, and the third question is the implementation of chaos management or how to re-flash a chaotic culture? Because, for example, even a leader seriously took up and decided to go the path of a righteous life. But those who started a new life know that after you decide to start a new life, it seems that the world has declared war on you, right? That is, it somehow feels like everyone has conspired to knock you off this path. It's like someone went on a diet, right? For some reason, on the second day after a firm decision, various temptations begin to appear on the road, right, in the form of birthdays, delicious cakes. Well, what tempts whom, for some it's a hamburger, for some it's a cheeseburger. The same thing happens when implementing in a company. Well, there is the leader himself, he decided to do something. After that, the question is, will his subordinates do it. For example, the leader decided to set a standard time for contact with subordinates. But subordinates do not want to follow this, right? They, under any plausible pretext, still strive to approach him at a time when it is convenient for them. The fact is that a leader often cannot be the master of his own time. He seems to be planning something, and then for some reason, it turns out that all this time disappears somewhere, is plundered by someone. Yes, this happens, judging by the nods of colleagues. Well, so the question of implementing chaos management, right, or as I call it, how to re-flash a chaotic culture, that is, well, the culture that has developed in the company. That is, a decision is not enough, it is not enough that you yourself are the center of these correct things. But how, in fact, to make people implement it? These are three aspects. Well, let's do it this way. Let's go slowly, right, because this is, in fact, our webinar. And I, forgive me, have an honest rule, right, when it comes to a free and short webinar, I don't have the idea to feed you with such "fishings," right, like 25 smart secrets, 15 ways, because, firstly, nothing will come of it. Secondly, to present in 40 minutes what fits into 3 days, in fact, I wouldn't do it, right, and it won't work. Therefore, we will just touch upon the topic. And, for example, let's take such an idea as some self-organization techniques that may be useful. Well, for example, such a moment as planning your day, right? How? Well, I always recommend dividing the day into two-hour segments, one and a half to two hours. And within the two-hour segments, we place either one task completely, or a piece of the elephant metaphorically. Such a tale, bite by bite, right, a clearly understood piece. Or, these are several tasks collected sequentially, right? That is, for 2 hours we do, there, do one, do two, do three, do four, do five. Why two-hour segments? Because it is within one and a half to two hours that the human brain is capable of such serious load. Yes, the human brain is a sprinter, not a marathon runner. That is, it cannot work for so long, highly productively. It can sprint, then it needs a break. This ability to work productively for one and a half to two hours is individual, it can depend, of course, on what was drunk yesterday, on how much you slept, but nevertheless, if we remove these disturbing factors of the external environment, it's one and a half to two hours. Yes, of course, descendants of Martians are not affected. Reasonable dolphins either. They can be different. Therefore, those of you who belong to this tribe are an exception. Those who are biologically Homo sapiens, sapiens, most likely, you are not a phenomenon, but someone else, right? So, just in case. Well, on the other hand, what am I getting at, we don't take any idea to the point of madness. If we are working, 2 hours have passed, and we have 5 minutes left, then I'll reveal a big secret, it's better to finish the task, there's no need to take a break, because Alexander Friedman said so, right? So we calmly complete this task. Understood? But if we still have a three-hour task, then we see, right, then I advise you to break it down into two segments of one and a half hours. And it's clear to you? Well, because it's the right way. That is, we worked for an hour and a half, took a break, then worked for another hour and a half. How long should the break be? Well, the minimum break that the brain needs is 15 minutes. And 15 minutes, what to do during these 15 minutes? Well, the most wrong thing, although better than nothing, is to change the type of intellectual activity. Well, out of three. But it's better than continuing the activity, right? It's better to change the type, but it's the worst possible. And God forbid you to rest by checking your email. A typical mistake of a leader, right? Well, like, I'll rest for a bit, I'll check my email. Why shouldn't you check your email as a form of rest? I have a question. If anyone has done sports, why shouldn't you, after working out on a simulator, lift a heavy barbell for rest? Well, the idea is strange, right, but why not rest? And, preferably, lift with the same muscles that were worked out on the simulator, right? Well, so that you rest well. From the point of view of brain load, checking email is a superset, that is, a superload, right? Because in a short time we need to absorb, perhaps, poorly presented information, recall files, remember the movie "Total Recall," right? Formulate an answer, broadcast it encoded, immediately take the second email, which may not be related to the first, right? And after that, broadcast again and do this 10 times. That is, for the brain, this is a hyperload. Well, first, what not to do, right? So, if you want to overload your brain, do email, if you don't want to, don't overload it. The next point. The second option. Well, it's better, but also not optimal. You just need to do nothing. Well, you can knit, for example, right? So, you can just look east, you can look west. Whatever you like more. Drink tea, drink coffee, right? That is, just do nothing. And the best type of break, which helps the brain not only to rest but also to recover, that is, restorative rest, right? That is, essentially, returning the brain to its initial productivity state. This is light physical activity. And light means light. That is, do not ask: "Where will I wash in the office then?" Do not wash. Light, precisely. That is, you can just walk for 15 minutes, you can go up and down the stairs, you can wave your hands, you can juggle an apple, you can take a tennis ball and tap it. That is, understood, right? Light physical activity. That's it, 15 minutes. Well, the question is, what will a subordinate think if they see me waving my hands? I will not answer it, because if you are worried about that, you have come to the wrong place at all. Yes, this is simply not the question that I consider appropriate to answer for intelligent people, and I consider talking to stupid people not very worthwhile. Yes, if your authority is based on your regalness, then treat yourself for something else. Yes, perhaps electrolysis baths will help. That's why we are not worried about what subordinates will think. Tell them that you have acquired another habit. Yes, whatever. Therefore, 15 minutes of light physical activity is optimal. The brain rests, the brain is ready to work. If we plan the day correctly, what happens? We actually work with full productivity throughout the entire working day. Well, my personal practice is not an example, but an illustration, because I do not encourage you to follow my example at all. I can calmly maintain a normal load from 9:00 to 8:00 in the evening, yes, very calmly. That is, I leave tired, but not depleted. These are fundamentally different things, right? That is, like after training, right? You leave tired after a productive workout, or you crawl out completely exhausted, right? This is precisely thanks to the breaks I take. So, a paradoxical fact, it seems that I work less in terms of time, I rest, right? But I manage to achieve not so much more as better. Understood, right? Because of the quality of brain work. Because when the brain is tired, right, it performs the tasks set, but at the same time an interesting shift occurs. That is, not those parts of the brain are working. More on this, forgive me, at the seminar, right? Simply put, other muscles are working. Here are muscles that are not designed for analytical activity, but are designed for physical interaction with an external enemy. The brain, since it executes commands, if we order it to do some analytical report, it will do it. The question is, with what quality. Not for nothing is there a saying that today's problem is the result of yesterday's wrong decisions. Well, we blame it on the market, on business. In general, the word "business" explains a lot, right? Any nonsense is explained by "it's business." Yes, when something is done through one place, we explain: "It's business." Yes. Yes. Well, business, mess, business, business, lack of logic, business, wrong approach to your own brain, this does not mean that they are synonyms, right, just in case. So, breaks. The idea is clear, right? If we decided to work for an hour and a half to two hours, then I, of course, recommend turning off all communication devices, phones, turning off email notifications. I generally do not believe that email notifications should sound. Yes, not sound, not appear. That is, I call this a "radio silence" mode, right? A person needs to concentrate, not get distracted. The attempt to get distracted sharply reduces productivity while simultaneously worsening the quality of thinking and creating the illusion that you are managing to do everything faster. That is, there is such a concept as multitasking, right? This is a wild scourge of intellectual activity, a wild scourge of productivity. And when today more and more often there are ads: "We are looking for people capable of multitasking." I say: "Guys, why not immediately write: 'Mutants wanted, Martians wanted, aliens from the constellation Alpha Centauri wanted.'" Because any neurobiologist will explain to you, right, that purely from the point of view of the material part, a person cannot simultaneously solve two intellectual tasks. Well, God did not give him such a device. Whatever you do, right? That's how it is. But again, I remind you, mutants are not affected, everything is different for them. A person can switch from work to work, but switching from work to work, as I said, right, sharply reduces productivity by about three times with the illusion that you are doing everything faster. Numerous experiments have been conducted, right, well, many such quality ones, when people are given one job to do calmly, then a second calmly, then a third calmly, or constantly from the first to the second, from the second to the third, from the third to the first, right, productivity flies by three times even with simple motor actions. But again, the illusion that I do everything quickly. Why does this happen? Well, you know, probably, that when you start thinking about something, you don't get into it right away, right? There is such a mode of entering a task, right? Well, if I can put it very popularly, it's like gathering a cognitive team, because when we want to do something, we send certain search signals to the brain. Very primitively explained, right, it's like, here we need this, right, a signal goes and checks where it is, and various parts of the brain connect, right, where there is information and tools. Understood? So, we need to gather parts of the brain where there is the necessary information. And we know that our memory, well, here's a simple example. Let's take the word "dog," right? So, it's very complexly recorded for us. What parameters does the word "dog" have? Sound. Yes, visually, each person has some first association with a dog. For some, it's one dog, for another, another. For someone, perhaps, a childhood memory, a dog attacked them, right? For someone, it's the smell of wet dog fur. Understand the idea? Yes. Well, the word "dog" is associated with a whole set of parameters of this word. And these parameters, we know that we have different types of memory, right? Tactile and so on, and so on, and so on. Well, there are correct names for these types. And when we say "dog, dog," we are sort of gathering files that contain information about dogs. Some of them are needed, some are not. We say: "This is useless, right?" Voila, this is it. Then we need tools to process the word "dog," probably metaphorically, something we are gathering. And after some time, say, 10-20 minutes, it is necessary that this group finally gathers, that is, the necessary parts of the brain connect, right, and the necessary techniques are activated. It is understood that the more often we touch upon this topic, the faster it connects. If less often, then longer. So, we have gathered the group and the work has begun. The peak has been reached. Yes. But then something happened that the brilliant poet Korney Chukovsky brilliantly described. My phone rang. Who is speaking? What do you want? Chocolate. Well, and remember, then the brilliant insightful thought. And such nonsense all day. Then the telly rings, then the deer. Yes. See, what does genius mean? He foresaw the everyday life of a modern leader. Yes. But he, of course, did not foresee that besides the ringing phone, there are also many other gadgets that also try to reach the leader through various means, right? And we happily install new gadgets, right? Which beep here, which beep there. So, in general, an interrupting factor has arisen. What happens to the cognitive team? We sort of, the brain is forced to disband it. It cannot put it on hold and move on. It is forced, its capacity is occupied. But the disbandment of such a team occurs for the brain in a very unproductive mode, right? Approximately like this. This is if it's face-to-face, right? Well, roughly speaking, the computer was turned off by the power button, right? So harsh for the brain. This is like "boo." Okay, we dealt with the phone, abstractly speaking, or an incoming subordinate, or someone there, Ivan Petrovich, just for a second, here's a paper, it's urgent, right? Or here's what to do in the yard, something like that. Well, in general, it's familiar, right? Because if this is not your topic, then the seminar is also unnecessary for you. Okay. So, we have resolved the issue and tried to reassemble this group. By the way, the time we spent gathering the first time, it is understandable. But when we start gathering this group for the second time, why, remember, I said, productivity drops and quality of decisions sharply deteriorates? And why do you think the quality of decisions deteriorates now? Well, we have gathered the relevant groups again. And the ideas, colleagues, not all files can respond anymore, because this disbandment of the cognitive team is not a computer, right? And some part there, somewhere there, did not respond. And the second group may turn out to be smaller. That is, not all information is there. By the way, an example. Have you encountered such a strange phenomenon? A person made a decision. Made the wrong decision. At the same time, he had all the information. Have you encountered this? Yes. And you say to him: "Alexander Semenovich, how could you decide like that?" He says, "But you knew this." He says, "Yes, and you knew this, yes, and you knew this." Yes. So how could you decide all this like this? And literally without a hitch, right? The person cannot understand, indeed, how he got so stuck, right? That it seemed like everything was known to him, but the decision was made incorrectly, right? Everything was known. Well, what was known? It was stored somewhere, you understand? Yes. But when he was gathering this second or fifth group, some file there did not respond or some tool did not connect. Understand the idea? Yes. And that's it. And he solved the problem in some new variant without part of the files. Understood, right? And that's why several such breaks. The brain is torn to pieces. In fact, it is not ready to think. The reserve combat system is activated, which helps Chuka survive, which says: "Well, what's the problem? Now we'll get them all." So we tell him: "And here we need to resolve a report." It says: "No problem, it's fine." So, the next one. So, this one is not fine. Prepare better. So, the next one. What do you have? So, an unprepared question. Let's work. Have you encountered such a "berserk" model? That is, the person is so reckless. Here we sign, here we don't sign. Yes, but the brain is not involved there. Only, excuse me, the spinal cord. Yes, I watched how a leader sometimes, right, works, let's say, like this. Aha. Statement: Alexander Shrin requests a salary increase of 10,000. So, Alexander, 10,000. Well, he seems like a normal guy. Okay. Aha. Then someone else asks for this. Well, okay. The third asks for money to buy a computer. What is the leader's reaction? Nothing. Are you all crazy, everyone wants money? I'll take it all. So refuse. Remember the third famous sniper shot? Yes. So the third one was unlucky. It could have been the other way around. Alexander Friedman could have been refused. It depends on where the statement was, right? Because the spinal cord, the conditional spinal cord, it perceives how? It perceives like an underdeveloped Polynesian tribe. 1, 2, 3, then many. Yes. The first request, well, okay, it doesn't matter, it's justified, unjustified, we need to figure it out, right? Then the second request, well, okay, the third, enough, I'm tired. Well, logic doesn't work, right? Maybe we should have only signed the third one, refused the first two, left them for further work, but the leader doesn't think about it. That's the idea, right? Therefore, at the moment when the leader decides to think about something, in fact, no one should disturb him, the leader must ensure this. And that's exactly how to make your rules work, what rules to apply. That's what the third seminar will be about, how to re-flash the chaotic culture of chaos management implementation, right? That's what the course will be in April, the 5th, 7th, 9th, 6th, 7th of April. There will be three seminars. And the third course, because in the first two we teach principles, but you cannot immediately implement principles. You need to understand how not to damage what works. Right? You cannot simply cancel what is currently holding your system together. So, you cannot simply say: "You cannot come to me," because the question is, when can you? A logical question. Right? If you simply tell a person: "You cannot come to me" and do not specify when you can, well, to say that you will leave him in slight bewilderment, you say nothing. And in some companies, an interesting game flourishes: catch the boss in the corridor. Preferably on the way to the toilet, then he will sign everything if he really wants to. Rightly submitted paper is a guarantee. Well, conditional paper, right? Yes. There are companies where they bribe the secretary. Call me first. Well, because the boss has some reserve of openness and readiness. The main thing is to be quick. And this, unfortunately, is not a joke. These are just quirks of our town. I have been compiling my own chaos management system for about 10 years, and I have been implementing it for 13 years, right? And I have accumulated such rich statistics. And the statistics, you understand, are not from newsstands, where it's like, who cares, right? When I and shawarma, a company, right? Well, okay, anything can happen. No, these are normal, serious companies with good money. And there, you just marvel when you describe this as a joke. But it's real, right? That's how people organized everything. And in general, in a company, it's good tone to constantly "use" each other. Well, we know that "use" has several meanings, and a rather harsh one, right? If I'm not a great expert in English, but if you say "don't use me," it's quite rude, right? It's, yes, it's even difficult to translate literarily, it doesn't become everything, right? In general, "don't use me" also doesn't fully define what it means, right? Yes. And in all companies, they "use" each other in a bad sense, right? Through various sources in the corridor and so on. People are a continuous informational promiscuity, right? Disorderly sexual relations, where they meet and connect, right? A leader catches someone in the corridor, says: "Oh, what's up with that?" Yes, what are you doing now? I'm like, controlling. No, I say, this is called corridor intimidation, right? This is not control, a fundamentally different form, right? A subordinate catches. Oh, Ivanovich, I just wanted to discuss this with you, right? Oh, Alexanderovich, you wrote me an email, I wanted to tell you, right? Here, it's like, understood, right? Two people are standing, talking about work. What always interests me is, if it's an important issue, why are they discussing it at a random meeting in the office? It's always interesting, what if they hadn't met? Would events have gone unpredictably, right? Or would the world issue not have been resolved? It's interesting. But they met. The main thing is, everyone has time to talk. It's great to record, but no one records. They just exchange fluids, quoting the movie "The Fifth Element," right? There's a feeling that if I sent something there, it started to be done. So, the person also gets the feeling that they said something, right? They all exchanged updates and went their separate ways. Everyone felt better. Yes, then they were surprised that no one did anything. By the way, the first thing I do when I come to a consulting project is, even before I've taught anyone anything, right? I always say: "Colleagues, so, let's do this. The first rule of safe interaction with me." I say: "I don't talk about work in the corridor, in principle. Therefore, any attempt to talk to me in the corridor during a chance encounter about work will, I say, end quite painfully." Yes. So, if someone needs to go to the office, then welcome. I haven't set the rules yet. I want to stop corridor management. Yes. At least in relation to myself, because I am absolutely not ready to respond to someone's updates during a chance encounter, trying to catch me. Again, I am introducing the rule that if I am going somewhere, any attempt to stop me is very fraught with, from my side, very aggressive actions. Not because I'm a scoundrel, but because I know the right way. Because I want to teach people that you will break this habit. Yes, and this is faster. I say, faster and correct are not the same thing. And although everyone is now striving to work faster, everyone has the illusion that they need to work fast. Colleagues, you need to work not fast, but accurately. Accurately. And this is not just a play on words, in my opinion, because we are used to thinking in the antithesis of fast, slow. We are used to thinking that if not immediately, then never. Right, psychologically. That is, if I don't do it quickly, then I will do it slowly. Yes, many such public opinion leaders, right? Ivan Petrovich, how did you get rich? We moved everything quickly, right? Alexanderich, how did you become a billionaire? We are not standing still, the world demands speed. Have you heard this? The world demands not speed, colleagues, in my opinion, the world demands accuracy. By the way, in my opinion, this famous translation "just in time," right? As if from Japanese. Well, firstly, it's not quite like that, in fact, right? As if there are completely different meanings there, with hieroglyphs. And secondly, in my opinion, "accurate and on time." There is a tautology in this. Imagine the antithesis: accurate and not on time. Well, in my opinion, "not on time" is already not accurate, right? That is, time is one of the concepts of accuracy. And in my opinion, the concept of "accurate" is a cumulative concept. It means doing what is needed, how it is needed, and when it is needed, right? That is accuracy. Therefore, "accurate and on time," I say, I can hardly imagine "not on time and accurate." It's somehow not accurate anymore. Therefore, for me, the antithesis of fast is accurate, not slow. That is, I am simply drawing a different axis, right? Not the dichotomy of fast-slow, but okay, fast-slow, accurate, inaccurate. And from my point of view, business needs accuracy, not speed. What's the point of doing the wrong things quickly, for example, right? Let's say, well, and many other things, to do quickly, not as it should be, but what is needed. I don't see much sense in that. Therefore, I teach people to work not fast, but accurately, and to organize precisely the accuracy of the corporate governance system, not speed, because if the system is set up accurately, you can achieve any results you are interested in. Therefore, it is very important instead of multitasking, instead of multitasking, to train yourself in concentration. That is, if I have already sat down to do something for an hour and a half, right? Well, only if there is an event of Christ's people or something of similar significance, like the arrival of the Messiah, you know, a call from the Lord, well, in general, from the corresponding Lord. Others simply cannot reach you, right? And it is understood that for this you can use five VIP numbers, approximately, well, five VIP numbers that always call. Understood, you can use secretaries, set up an office network. Understand, colleagues, technically this is solved very simply. There was a habit. Well, and technical seminars, I never discuss questions at seminars, because, well, how to set up an office network? Well, I say, let's bet on which good whiskey, that there are specialists who know how to do this. Or is your office network again inherited from Saturnian aliens and earthly technology is powerless? Well, then throw it away, install an earthly one. Yes, I am not a specialist in this. I really dislike taking away the bread from specialists. Therefore, this issue is resolved. And if we are talking about the first person and top managers, right? Then, of course, it is very important that people have the opportunity to meet with you on a regular guaranteed basis. That is, I believe that the basis of accurate management is that every employee, subordinate to you, well, has guaranteed time to meet with you. The idea is clear, right? That is, for example, I know that I have a meeting with you, I don't know, on Tuesday from 3 to 5 or from 4 to 5. Well, a precise time. Yes. And this is a constant time, which can be changed in case of unforeseen circumstances, right? But in other cases, it does not change, and it does not require special confirmation, right? That is, since no corrections are made, I know that this meeting will take place at this time, in this place. Understood? This is very important. This guarantees what I call contact optimization, when people, instead of running around and "using" each other constantly, and perhaps, you know, some have such a cute habit, they can come in five times a minute, right? Once on the way to the kitchen, the second time on the way to the toilet, the third time remembering something, the fourth time receiving an SMS. Is there no such thing, right? Well, people don't know how to do it right, right? Therefore, they try to do everything quickly. As a result, everyone tries to do everything quickly, and as a result, complete nonsense happens. Approximately these are the things. These disconnections, how many times a day, if I sit down to do something, then I don't react to anything. I recommend a break between two immersions of at least half an hour, of which 15 minutes is brain charging, right? And the first 15 minutes is the so-called chaos window, right? That is, this is the time when I have worked, say, for an hour and a half or two hours, and for 15 minutes I am ready to solve some urgent issues, right? To answer some missed calls, maybe to resolve emerging difficulties. And this chaos window can be longer than 15 minutes, right? It depends on the hustle and bustle of the universe around you, on the level of uncertainty. You can keep the window open for half an hour, you can keep it for an hour, again, there may be more time in the day, less time. Understood, right? So, here you just need to adjust. For an hour and a half, by default, you think about what you chose, then the necessary chaos window, then 15 minutes of brain charging, when you are no longer reacting, and then the next task begins. Is the idea clear? Yes. So, somehow like this, yes. For many years I have lived by the principle: "No one will die in 2 hours." If they die, then let them go, because I, well, honestly, I don't work in the Ministry of Emergency Situations, I'm not. Understood, right? That is, if again, it's not a reception, not a delivery service, not an emergency response service, right? Not special forces, well, understood, don't take the idea to the point of madness, because there are services that respond to a green whistle, right? They should respond to a green whistle. We are talking about thinking beings, right? Who, however, should think sometime. And somehow, you know, everything happens normally in its own way. All the scary things I hear: "What if, what then?" Well, I've been listening for 13 years, what if? Well, as a rule, there is usually nothing behind it, but you know that it often fuels it. And today, you know, like the phrase "British scientists have calculated," it has already become a prelude to a joke, right? But nevertheless, various scientists calculate different things. Including scientists note that today there has appeared a certain dependence on gadgets, dependence on information flows. Yes, a person cannot help but touch something with their hands literally within a minute and a half. And experiments were conducted, people were simply seated in a room and no one bothered them at all. Well, some phones and other things were left, so as if, well, to him, but after some time he reached out himself, looked there, am I needed by anyone, right? This is like, you know, the syndrome "I'm connected to the world." Well, it's nice to feel that the world cannot exist without me for a second, right? Yes. And when it turns out that it can, it's even offensive, because I have conducted numerous experiments in coaching. I say: "Guys, let's prepare everything like this, warn everyone, but not so that we just disappear, right? That's also wrong." Everyone is used to it, Shish is always there, connected by eight heels, and if he suddenly disappears, then it's a nightmare, they'll start looking for him with dogs. Yes, no, we prepared the situation, warned them, left, surfaced, damn it, surprise. The sun is still in place, the earth is on the same geocentric orbit. Yes, this is what is most humiliating. That is, the world did not notice that I stopped managing it. Understand? Imagine what a blow to self-esteem. Ego, that they can do it too? Aha, that's sad. Ah, well, these are, I mean, I'm not talking about the whole system. I'm just saying, you know, you come, you don't come, but this will always be useful. Email. I recommend, of course, checking at a chosen time, by no means in passing. Well, how much do you need per day, do you want two, do you want four, right? But not in passing. That is, email should be checked when you have planned it. By the way, within a company, in my opinion, email should not be an urgent communication channel. And email by default implies that, well, the basic response time should be within a day. Well, email, electronic documents, circulation, it doesn't matter what device you have, right? It's not the point. Not that it's electronic, right? This is not an urgent communication channel, or is it an urgent communication channel in some special situations, but again with understandable access. Well, what does that mean? For example, at 4:00 PM everyone gathers for some kind of internet meeting, that's understandable, right? But this is again not an urgent communication channel. An urgent communication channel is allowed when there is some information file that is sent by email. Then there is a notification that, attention, ay-ay-ay, you need to go in immediately. Well, in this case, email is an urgent channel. But in all other respects, email is something that you can answer later today. Well, such a basic, precisely the implementation of chaos management. The third seminar on the 7th will precisely describe what needs to be resolved in the company. Within what timeframe to respond to email. In many companies, there is a nice rule that if you don't reply to email within an hour, the culprit is hanged on the gates. And it's always interesting, are people doing anything other than corresponding? Most likely, they are constantly engaged in some kind of manual labor, right? They are writing something somewhere, right? But work, well, work is not only about this, right? Well, it turns out that only about this, right? Everyone exchanges some information with each other. That's it, briefly. Therefore, I am a big opponent of the attempt at multitasking, simply because I know the brain's work very well, so it's useless. On the contrary, instead of multitasking, concentration, but concentration on selected issues, that is, setting priorities, a selected issue, and, in fact, working on this issue. Is the idea clear, right? That is, the productivity of a leader is measured not by the number of working hours and not by the amount done, but, excuse me, by the quality of what is chosen, because you will never do everything, even if you die. You can extend the working day, you can add eight hands to something, right? You still won't be able to finish all the work, and, in fact, you don't need to, right? There is more work than time. There is such a paradox of chaos management for me: there is always more work than time. Therefore, the question is not how to do everything, but the question is what to choose. This is a more correct question, right? Uh, when you say to yourself: "I will do everything," then, in fact, why set priorities? Yes, if I will do everything anyway. And you start, and as a rule, the one who tries to do everything does not manage to do what absolutely needs to be done. That's how it is. Well, colleagues, please, have any questions come in, have they not? You spoke more about self-organization. And what do you do regarding management planning? That is, Oh, a lot. Okay. Ah, colleague, well, I've talked about self-organization. I, well, what can I say? I plan, right? But that's not an answer. There is a technology, there is a methodology. It, in general, does not represent any, I'll say right away, super-original version. It's just that when it comes to, you know, many books are published on this topic annually, right? There is David Allen's system, there is Gleb Arkhangelsky, right? With his bestsellers. And without irony. And in the preface to my book "You or Chaos: Professional Planning for Real Life," I wrote the following: paraphrasing Tolstoy, everyone who has found their system is happy in their own way, and those who haven't found it are unhappy in the same way, because they are tossed about in chaos, right? That is, there is no ideal system. And I won't explain mine in 2 minutes, right? But if you are in chaos, it means you haven't found a system. Which one will help you? Sometimes people ask me: "And how will your system help me if I'm already using David Allen's system and playing GTD?" Are you satisfied? Yes, probably nothing. It's not flattery, probably nothing, but you understand, that's not the point. Well, if you are satisfied with the system, then it is good. And I have put together such a system for myself, I say: "Are you satisfied?" Yes. Well, then it is good. So it's not useless to talk about the best system. I have my own system, I teach it. But if you ask me, sometimes people say: "How is it better than others?" I say: "You know, perhaps, nothing. It's just my own, in principle, a combination. That's how it is. Therefore, here, how I will describe this system in 2 minutes, as I said about self-organization, because these are techniques that can be used in addition to planning, right? Well, for example, one of the mandatory things that I do is I always "stitch" my calendar. That is, when I have several events in a day, I always schedule them for the day and hour. A typical mistake of a planner. He puts meetings on the calendar, and writes tasks in a column in the task block. Well, if we take Altu, for example, I consider it a big technological mistake. I believe that any task that we want to be done should fall into the calendar field in the form of blocks, well, two-hour, one-hour blocks, right? Because everything that takes time should be planned in blocks. Work that can be done if there is enough time can be left outside the time and date reference, you know, like "it would be nice if." Mandatory tasks are always scheduled for the day and hour, right? Because work takes time, right? And from the point of view of time expenditure, from 9:00 to 11:00 I have either one, or another, or the first, second, third. Within nine to eleven. Understood, right? From the fact that I scheduled a meeting from 9 to 11, and wrote a list of 15 tasks, I still don't know how much time each will take. Therefore, well, one of my conditions is "stitching the calendar," I call it, right? That is, what I want to happen, it goes into my calendar for the day and time without fail. What doesn't go into the calendar, for 90% of leaders, they won't manage to do it. And in coaching, it also happens that you talk with a leader, well, conditionally, he says: "I, unfortunately, didn't manage to do it." I always ask: "For what day and hour did you schedule this for yourself?" And very rarely do they say: "I scheduled it for this time, but then God himself arrived." Yes, and I had to live. As Ravich says: "Well, I didn't plan it for a specific time, I wanted to do it on this day." Well, you can't do something on this day. You can do something at a specific time. Well, on this day, you can plan to do what you can and cannot do. Yes, there's no point in linking that. So, make a general list of such tasks without urgency, right? And what you want to be done, always link it to the day and hour, right?
In fact, by this, you confirm the priority of A or B, yes, that is what is important. Well, another one of the quirks: there is no such thing as no time, there is such a thing as the issue not being a priority. For me, this is a strict axiom. This is also part of my system. Please, a question. Yes. And colleagues, if possible, a question, I would be very glad for a very specific one, because a general question like, how do you do this, well, to that. Yes. Alexander, such a question. How do you assess that in the company, the planning competence of management is at a high level? This is the first part of the question. Now, now, how do I assess that it is at a high level? Well, among management competencies, planning is one of the key competencies. I think so, yes. And when the head of sales plans his time, and the entire office and employees do not plan, we can say that the overall assessment of planning in the system, well, apparently, in the system there is no single point of view on what planning is. Apparently, it is not seen as a mandatory technology, but rather as something that would be good for everyone to do. Yes. Ah, yes. And the question, the question is, in what proportions should the training of planning competence for company management be carried out technologically? That is, how many stops and to what level and with what regularity. Understood, understood. Let me try to be sequential. Thank you. So, in my opinion, exclusively from top to bottom, because a leader can, well, for those below him to plan, he must plan himself. He can stop planning when he is convinced that a stopwatch is working below, yes, and it is working on a permanent basis. But it will take about three years, I would say, to really push this topic with all diligence into various parts of the bodies. That's it. Because people prefer to rush around and prefer to do more. Something like that, yes? Firstly, from top to bottom. Regularity. Well, you understand, repeating the same thing is definitely pointless. So, the whole question is not so much about the regularity of training, but the whole question is that after training there should be implementation. And implementation should be carried out according to clear procedures, not in the form of chanting mantras, but in the form of strict technologies. And the company, if it wants to, must make a decision. So, is this a good message, like it would be good for you to apply this, or is it a strict technology? It's clear, because training as a strict technology is one thing. Training as a good message is something else. Yes, and people, when they go for training, should clearly understand whether they will be trained to broaden their horizons or whether they will be trained in technologies that the company considers mandatory to adopt. Yes. Therefore, the question is not about regularity, yes, but about what happens before and what happens after. That's it. Because if the training is conducted correctly and is accompanied by the right message, that we have planning, and correct implementation, no options, you either work as required, or you don't work with us, and that's a broad democratic choice. We cannot force a person to suffer in our company, right? Today it believes that it humiliates his human dignity with such dirty solicitations in the form of planning. A free person in a free country has a free democratic choice. Yes. That's it. That is much more important than the question of how often you train. Another question is that implementation can have certain supporting sessions, certain reviews, joint decisions on the mandatory nature of certain actions. So the system should be flexible. Well, flexible. Not in the sense of I want, I do, I want, I don't do, but in the sense that if I see that what is being offered to me clearly contradicts something, then I should give a green whistle. But this is one of the principles of regular management, which sounds like this, well, in my connotation, that any rule can be discussed, any rule can be changed, but no rule can be broken. Yes, this makes people worthy, conscious participants in this process, yes? So we are not slaves to rules, we are creators of rules, we are developers of rules, yes? We need rules for precise, effective work for the sake of company results. I am not touching upon such a topic as motivation at all now, because we will not return from there. In my opinion, discipline is more important at some point, yes, then motivation will appear. And so, it's something like that, yes, I understand time comprehensively, colleague, yes? Or hello, question? My name is Maxim. You mentioned the TTX of the brain. Could you elaborate on this point in more detail? No, we just won't have time. Even so much. Well, welcome to the seminar, yes? So, you understand, there is a huge amount of writing about this, yes? This is really a conversation for an hour and a half. It's not that I'm stingy, like, come to the seminar, yes, just briefly. Well, we know that there are different parts of the brain, yes, like the right, left, very roughly, yes, the left is for speech, but it's actually more complicated. And therefore, a leader, at the first seminar, definitely instead of urgent technology of managerial thinking, which is on April 5th, we discuss this in quite detail, well, in a reasonable user-level detail, yes, so that the leader understands how his brain is structured using block diagrams, because then it can be managed, because then certain recommendations and certain non-recommendations become more logical, yes, when they are based on understanding why. There is such a basic setting. Diagnostics of an event. Well, the brain must be able to quickly understand if an event is harmful or beneficial. Yes. A healthy ancient thing. Reaction speed is very high, but the problem is that the brain has not learned to distinguish the harmfulness of events. For it, any event is harmful. Well, any unexpected event that is not super beneficial is harmful. This is the principle of a mushroom picker. If you don't know if a mushroom is poisonous, consider it poisonous, yes? You will be safe. It's the same for the brain. What is not an obvious bonus is a problem just in case. But the brain does not distinguish between types of problems. So, for example, an attack by a saber-toothed penguin, a difficult report, a serious business issue, are equally dangerous things for the brain, because in both cases you can fail, yes, and the brain reacts either with attack or defense. So it does not distinguish between types of dangers, yes, for it, danger, an unpleasant event, an unpleasant event, in collision with which one can fail. The brain translates everything into physical death. That's roughly how, for example, one of the interesting properties. Therefore, it must be understood that the brain reacts to events in this way. Thank you. You're welcome, you're welcome. Any more questions, colleagues? Yes. Well, then why I Thank you for the question. I consider this an obligatory part. Why the first seminar, yes? Because when you understand certain understandable settings, it becomes clear what is happening. The simplest example. When the brain thinks, it thinks productively, yes, its energy consumption sharply increases, by three times. From the perspective of the defense system, this is a super unpleasant event, because suddenly some organ started consuming three times more energy, and the defense system tries to remove a person from this process. It throws up all sorts of interesting distractions, for example, to drink coffee, then to go to the toilet, then to look at a magazine, and then two hours are gone. So, what does this give? We cannot turn off this block, but we can prevent it from controlling us. And when we sit down to do something, and the brain suggests: "Well, wait, don't rush. Do something else first." We understand who is messing around, and we can direct ourselves in the right direction. And when we don't understand who is messing around, raise your hand, who has had two hours disappear somewhere? Understood, yes? So, that's it. So, it's normal. We are not mutants, yes? This is a normal, natural reaction of the brain. It tries to remove the organism from what, from its point of view, is extremely incorrect behavior, because suddenly there is a war, it is tired. It doesn't know that the refrigerator is full, yes, that supermarkets are working. It thinks: "Oops, what if?" That's how it is. And when you know this, you don't give in to provocation. That's it. You work calmly. So, when you understand what is happening, then you have the opportunity to direct yourself with willpower to the right place, yes? So, to press somewhere, and not just like that, it will happen. That's the idea. Well, in my opinion, these are quite interesting things, so I put them into these three seminars. When I announced the seminars, I think more than once, April 5-7. I won't forget about it. I'm a greedy scoundrel. April 5th, 7th, yes? Ah, colleagues, about the price after the seminar, moreover, I don't even know it, and I don't sell it, and I don't influence it. This is Synergy. And they do this. The question is very simple. I read your books, and nothing works for me. Will you teach us? I don't know. You know, how to say it? I am extremely sorry. Moreover, I made a promise on Facebook and confirm that anyone who felt they bought the books in vain, I am ready to return the money. Wait, wait, let me finish. I am sincerely not provoking, yes, because I believe that if a person is dissatisfied, he has the right to return the product, and that is normal. And the ratio of like, dislike suits me perfectly. But you see, I don't know what is not working. I don't believe that nothing is working, because there are actions like, for example, you need to allocate 2 days and gather all your things together. Yes, I can ask you, did you allocate 2 days, or can't you allocate 2 days? Well, I have a habit of asking questions. And one in five tells me such a situation. I can't brush my teeth. I always ask: "Have you tried going into the bathroom and opening the door?" Well, try starting with that, you know, you approach the bathroom, turn on the light, open the door, find a toothbrush, find toothpaste, and somehow it all, well, then the brush just doesn't fit into your mouth, but it's also interesting what exactly is happening there, yes? So, how to combine the sizes, open your mouth, not confuse your mouth with your ear. Well, there can be many technological errors, you understand? Instead of a brush, we shove a shoe brush instead of a toothbrush. But you need to learn to figure it out, because the toothpaste might not fit in your mouth either. Well, everything is clear, but there are no miracles, you know. I once learned to assemble and disassemble automatic rifles. What I got used to is that an automatic rifle never fails to assemble, it's just that you put something in the wrong place, yes? That's what they taught me very well, that it never fails to assemble, if there are parts from an automatic rifle, it cannot fail to assemble. Even if you... I don't believe in miracles. Therefore, forgive me, colleague, no offense. You are doing something wrong. But usually, the first step is missing, yes. Moreover, for the first procedure, I usually recommend allocating, for the first three procedures of technology, I recommend allocating 2 days. Yes, 2 days for 8 hours. consecutively, yes, to launch the technology. And I say that for this, it is best to use weekends, because you don't need to conduct an experiment. I will try to implement a new technology, b to be out of circulation for 2 days. Well, you know, how much happiness arises from big experiments in a company, yes? Why shock people so much, yes? I say, let's delight the company a little bit, yes? For example, let's try first, then let's do it, yes? Therefore, let's allocate weekends. Well, this is a recommendation. A person says after a month: "Well, it's just not working out." I say: "And how did you do it?" Well, I came home in the evening, I say: "Aha, and I don't need to tell you any more, because when you came home in the evening, were you planning to work at 4 PM or 8 PM? Who did you promise such a story to? Interesting." I say: "You probably came home tired." Yes. I say: "Well, yes, who would have thought that a person comes home tired in the evening." I say: "You don't live alone?" Yes. I say: "Well, then there are 33 reasons." Refrigerator, bed, TV. Well, it's stupid, yes? An attempt with unsuitable means. The person wasn't going to do anything, really? He was just going to touch it. You shouldn't touch it, you should do it. For this, you need to organize everything correctly. And this question of not being able to find time. I have solved it with any manager in a snap. I say: "Let's try. Let's put your calendar here." So, what do we have now? March. M. I say: "What are you doing on May 14-15?" He says: "I don't know." I say: "Excellent, then you're coming to the work party." I say: "Well, since you're not doing anything, you'll be doing this, embed it in your calendar." And what if? I say: "If something happens, then drop this stupid idea to hell." But precisely if something happens. And if nothing happens, then you will definitely come out, yes, when you are invited to something other than nothing, but to some nonsense, you will say: "These days are busy for me." I say: "Imagine that you are flying to Timbuktu, the charter is paid for, the yacht is ordered, shashlik is being grilled." Well, somehow everything is full, yes, and somehow like that. So, it depends on you what will happen and what will not. Not on the world. Planning is the path to freedom. It is the only, at least in my worldview, opportunity to do what you consider right, when it is optimal. But when we say what you consider right, it means not a whim, like I want to become the Shah of Persia, yes, that this might not pass such a divertissement, but it also means a justified choice of goals. Yes, just in case. Everyone, I am not a big supporter of this idea. You just have to want it, and you can fly into space. Wanting here, as they say, is not enough. Understandable idea, yes? Therefore, when we say what you consider necessary when it is optimal, it means that you choose it, taking into account this logic, yes, and not at all. Second mistake. The leader says after the seminar: "Yes, that's it, I'm sitting down this weekend." I say: "And do you have any obligations for these upcoming weekends by chance?" "Well, probably." I say: "Well, why do you want to turn your life into a hardship so sharply?" No need for such a feat, yes? That's our favorite Russian tradition, Soviet, post-Soviet, either completely or in pieces, yes? Either immediately with a cry: "Damn it!", or I can't find time at all. Yes. I say: "You probably have obligations for these weekends. Well, what, should you ruin your life for others, yes? For the next weekend, there is also something." I say: "Let's say a month from now, there's nothing." No, the idea is to arrange it. Understood? Yes, please. The question is being resolved. Therefore, nothing is working out. You already understand my questions. At the seminar, I will talk about exactly what is in the book, but less detailed. The book is more detailed than the seminar. And at the seminar, I will not be able to answer global questions of the universe. That's why nothing is working out for me. I will answer: I don't know. You tell me how you did it. Well, I can, yes, like this. Well, what is called, try it like this, but again, without fanaticism, yes, without a feat, with some understanding of when and what, yes, not against the current processes. And as I say, always remember that you are not to blame for your subordinates not knowing something. Therefore, there is no idea: "Ah, I'll give them a hard time tomorrow." They are definitely not to blame here. Yes, people work as they are managed. And everything they do, they do under your wise leadership. Both the right and the wrong, unfortunately. That's it. Well, esteemed colleagues, thank you to the listeners, thank you for your attention. Those who want to go to the seminar, those who don't, continue to act correctly, take the recommendations, act. That's the idea. Thank you.