Employees in profit share

There are individuals who like to lead others. I don’t prefer to lead. In any case, since it is hard to bring in cash alone, you need to make a group, an organization, a group, where there is a chief, when in doubt, he is the proprietor, and there are recruited subordinates. I would have rather not be subordinate either, so I picked the lesser of two shades of malice, that is, I had to turn into the expert.

My first associates were additionally keen and innovative individuals – previous specialists. I paid them a little, however it was somewhat considerably more than the cash that they got in their ruined foundations.

Ideal compensation is one of the main issues I looked as a newly prepared business visionary.

Assuming that you pay nearly nothing, then, at that point, from one viewpoint, representatives have no motivator to work with full commitment, then again, it doesn’t look generally excellent according to an ethical perspective (“workers additionally have families, needs, wants,” I contemplated as a new intelligent ).

Paying more means removing cash from yourself. What’s more where did the cash for a genuine fix come from at the absolute starting point of the case?

I attempted to track down a center ground: I paid somewhat more than paid for comparative work in different places, and guaranteed (wisely without giving the specific numbers) to raise the installment “when the benefit goes.”

Things were going moderately smoothly, until unexpectedly an average emergency of the mid nineties emerged: subcontractors multiplied costs. What’s more simultaneously the cutoff time for installment under the agreement went to my “brief imaginative group”.

Everything rang and vibrated very nearly breakdown, however at that point the delegates of the recruited group made a respectable deal: they are prepared to give me a relief and work free of charge until the last consummation of the venture and the receipt of the primary item. What’s more in return for their liberality, they requested to pay them half of future benefits.

I panted. This interest proposition implied that my own benefit transformed into a fiction: because of various different expenses, employed specialists would get a few times more than I, the proprietor and head of the organization.

Yet, I concurred – in a circumstance where the clients had effectively paid a development for the future item, I had no way out.

Yet, these were still blossoms. So I would not trick them, insightful blackmailers forced their quality on me at all dealings with purchasers of items and surprisingly raised costs assuming they couldn’t help suspecting that their benefits would diminish. Accordingly, they frightened off practically all likely purchasers.

From that point forward, they concluded that if rather than cash I gave them “their portion” of the item, they would sell it with more noteworthy benefit. The matter finished in common unloading: neither I nor they acquired anything.

In any case, as V.I. Lenin in an article dedicated to the loss of the 1905 upset: “It was a troublesome however fundamental example.”

I made two fundamental determinations from my loss:

  • Try not to trust your workers and enlighten them concerning your challenges. As far as they might be concerned, you are a cash sack and that’s it. Assuming they see an opportunity to place their hand in this sack, they will do it.
  • Workers should be paid wages. No interest or offers, regardless of whether it appears to be advantageous from the get go. Also this might appear to be valuable, in light of the fact that a compensation is genuine cash that should be removed from your pocket; the portion of future benefits is only a hypothesis.

Be that as it may, we are making our own business unequivocally for creating a gain! Consequently, pass on the compensation to the employed staff, and don’t share the benefit, that is, the fundamental aftereffect of your business, with anybody and under any conditions.

Culmination 1:

In case there are troubles with paying compensations, then, at that point, it is smarter to get the missing cash than to allow the specialists to share.

Conclusion 2:

In case you can manage without an accomplice when beginning a business, you should manage without an accomplice. In business, as in the military, one-man order is essential: one is the Master, the lay are subordinates on a compensation. Great connections between accomplices are kept up with until the principal cash is gotten. Further, anxious conversations start on the theme: “Who worked more and who procured more.”

Culmination 3:

Assuming you make the representative an equivalent accomplice, then, at that point, the organization no longer has small time the board. This implies that you will burn through a great deal of time and nerves on joint conversation of many issues that you already effectively tackled all alone.

Result 4:

You don’t have anything to fear as long as you control the organization, as long as the organization is just yours and no other person’s. You can be tricked by one representative, let down another, take part of the cash for a third, ruin the fourth task, however this, generally speaking, isn’t deadly, in light of the fact that you actually have the actual business.

Just an accomplice can remove you from business. In contrast to a worker, even a high-positioning one, an accomplice can’t be terminated. To dispose of it, if important, it is important to do complex, multi-stage and once in a while costly activities. What’s more it’s anything but a reality that in the end you will dispose of your accomplice, and not he will dispose of you.

You may also like...