Learning Business Management From Microsoft And YAHOO

You probably have heard of two technology giants in the 90s of last century. Microsoft (Microsoft) and YAHOO (Yahoo) are trying to reclaim their power, but they have taken two different ways to assess winners and losers in their work.

Following Marisa Meijer's role as YAHOO CEO in July 2012, she set up a "workforce ranking and last knock-out" system, rating employees on the curve, and employees at the lowest level will be discouraged. Last week, YAHOO announced that the company had left 600 employees based on this ranking system.

A similar system of Darwin's survival of the fittest has been established in Microsoft for many years. But in November 12th, the company announced that it would abandon the mechanism and replace it with more frequent and informal assessments.

Which way is better? This is the hot topic of many corporate headquarters nowadays. The first is the success of General Electric, which goes back to the days of Jack Welch's leadership and the success of consulting companies such as McKinsey. It is also accused of creating a harmful corporate culture: mutual dismantling of employees rather than collaboration.

But the discussion is far beyond the scope of human resources. This is only the latest contention between the two kinds of enterprise ideology for the right to win. Imagine this as a "people-oriented" and "pay attention to process" competition. Supporters of the two way have data to support their theory; yet one side has already proved victory.

In the "people-oriented" camp, there are images. Google Companies such as (Google), The Container Store, Zappos and Intuit have such thinkers as Jim Collins and Peter Deruk. They believe that the company's ability to create profitable growth is the primary function of its staff. Happy people work harder and are more loyal to the company, which has turned to be more successful in the market - and correspondingly, the success of profits. This is more associated with collaboration than competition, and has a stronger association with open resources rather than closed systems. "When you look at these soft skills," said Mike fagglo, managing director of consulting firm thoughtLEADERS, "you either understand or do not understand. I mean, you tell me Winston Churchill's return on investment.

The "process oriented" camp believes that analysis, relentless competition and efficiency are more important than anything else. In Wall Street, though you earn a lot, your career is easy to end. This is a good example. Wal-Mart (Wal-Mart), Microsoft (until recently) and many private equity companies are other examples. (for example, let me take a look at my recent article on how Heinz (Heinz) has been squeezed by its private equity holders. Human capital is only an input of this system; it is a number, a fierce competition, and a driving force to reduce costs. Ask Larry, Allison of Oracle, who likes Gen Gi Khan's motto: "I am not successful enough and others will be defeated."