October 1, 2008
Angajati, Angajatori, Cariera, DespreFirme, Firme, Semnatura Editorului |
Comenteaza
|
DespreFirme.com:
In primul rand, nu vom face publice sub nicio forma identitatea utilizatorilor nostri. Ne propunem sa permitem utilizatorilor sa posteze numele managerilor din companiile in care muncesc, in mod special numele celor care au pozitii foarte inalte, aceste detalii fiind oricum publice. Companiile isi construiesc sau distrug reputatia pe piata muncii prin actiunile angajatilor. Totusi, credem ca suntem indreptatiti sa cerem ca performantele acelor indivizi sa fie facute publice. Oricum, asteptam comentariile si feedback-ul vostru pentru a ne ajuta sa luam o decizie.
In al doilea rand, afirmatia dvs conform careia cea mai importanta opinie despre o corporatie apartine clientilor sai este defectuoasa. Corporatiile sunt fictiuni legale carora li se da o personalitate pentru a permite oamenilor sa faca afaceri cu o responsabilitate mai scazuta fata de actiunile, succesele si esecurile institutiei. Asadar, corporatiile trebuie sa fie reglementate. Tutunul, Alcoolul, Alimentatia, Jucariile si Finantele sunt exemple clare de industrii in care corporatiilor le era permis in trecut sa abuzeze de accesul si controlul asupra pietei astfel incat puteau sa nu ofere cele mai calitative produse. Ca sa fim mai clari, cea mai importanta opinie despre o corporatie este piata. Fara sprijinul pietei, compania clacheaza. Sunt cateva piete despre care am putea discuta: piata de investitii, fara de care o corporatie ar inceta sa mai existe; piata vanzarilor, fara de care o corporatie nu poate negocia; piata reglementativa, fara de care o corporatie nu ar putea opera; piata locurilor de munca, fara de care o corporatie nu poate functiona.
Cea mai putin reglementata dintre acestea este piata muncii. Asta probabil se intampla din cauza ca aceasta este cea mai reglementata. Este foarte birocratizata de traditiile sufragiului si socialismului. Ceea ce lipseste e forta de munca cu adevarat coordonata care sa ceara un schimb de informatii transparent pentru a crea sau distruge un brand de angajator. Ganditi-va putin, cine ar investi intr-o companie care nu si-ar publica raportul anual? Cine ar cumpara un produs de la o companie care refuza sa scrie ingredientele unui produs pe ambalaj? De ce oare doar piata muncii trebuie sa stea in spatele unor nori de confidentialitate intre angajatori si angajat? Mi-ar placea ca intrebarea: cine ar accepta un job intr-o companie care nu-si face cunoscute beneficiile, valorile, etc., sa aiba aceeasi rezonanta si acelasi efect ca cele doua propozitii anterioare.
DespreFirme.com nu pretinde a fi marele motor al indentitatii corporative. Noi actionam ca un spatiu propice pentru angajati pentru a-si lansa opiniile despre piata muncii in asa fel incat sa dezvaluie partile bune si lipsurile oportunitatilor de angajare din Romania. Scopul nostru consta intr-o transparenta mai mare in contractul social de angajare si o distribuire mai scazuta a informatiei pe piata muncii pentru echitabilitate. Totusi, credem ca dezvaluirea mai mare trebuie sa fie unul din scopurile noastre.
In orice caz, aceasta credinta bruta in capitalism pur (proeminenta opiniei clientului) a noii clase manageriale si profesionale din Romania este periculoasa. Spoiala occidentala asupra pietei muncii nu a facut decat sa consolideze o anumita clasa stratificata din Europa de Est. E pacat ca generatia tanara a adoptat aceasta viziune. S-a intarit astfel ierarhia predecembrista cu pretul unei politici de neamestec in care clasele paralele necompetitive ar putea evolua. In timp ce vedem frictiuni si rivalitati intre aceste factiuni, niciuna nu reprezinta o reforma sau schimbare adevarata pentru Romania, si niciuna nu are o agenda de investitii sustenabile pentru o societate romaneasca mai prospera si mai mobila din punct de vedere social (a se citi echitabil).
USER:
Eu sunt convins ca ar trebui ca numele sa raman confidentiale, inclusiv cele ale managerilor. Cred ca istoria unui angajat intotdeauna va putea sa dea indicatii asupra identitatii sale. Spre deosebire de titlul site-ului eu cred ca trebuie sa existe si un spatiu in care sa fie despreangajati.com. Problema, morala, care se pune este ca spre deosebire de firme, care isi fac o reputatie mai mult sau mai putin buna prin intermediul acestui site, persoanele ar “sari in aer” daca ar fi supuse aceluiasi tratament. Cred ca acelasi lucru se va intampla si daca se va publica identitatea managerilor, care oricum sunt mult mai identificabili decat angajatii prin istoria angajarilor si care drept urmare cred ca nu sunt foarte fericiti de inegalitatea tratamentului.
O fi echitabil ce face desprefirme.com?
Pana la urma, parerea despre firme cea mai importanta vine de la clienti si nu de la angajati, manageri sau proprietari.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DespreFirme.com:
First of all, we are not going to make public in any way our user’s identities. We are proposing to allow users to post the names of managers for whom they work, particularly ones that hold senior level positions within the corporation, as most of their names are public record, in fact. Companies make or break their reputations in the job market through the actions of their employees. Thus, we feel we are justified to ask that those individuals’ performances be made public record. However, we invite further comment and feedback prior to finalizing our decision.
Second, your statement that the most important opinion of a corporation belongs to its client is seriously flawed. Corporations are legal fictions given personality to allow individuals to transact with less than complete responsibility toward the actions, successes and failures of the institution. As such, corporations need to be regulated. Tobacco, Alcohol, Food, Toys, and Financials are all clear examples of industries in which corporations have in the past been allowed to abuse their access and control of markets to shift less than best quality products and services upon unsuspecting clients. It is never client opinion alone that forces the corporations to change behavior. To be clear, the most important opinion about a corporation is the market. Without the support of the market, the corporation fails. There are several markets we may discuss: the investment market, without the confidence of which a corporation ceases to exist; the sales market, without the acceptance of which a corporation cannot transact; the regulatory market, without the compliance to which a corporation may not operate; the job market, without the interest of which a corporation cannot operate.
The most poorly regulated of these is the job market. That is probably because it is the most regulated. It has multiple layers of bureaucratic tape established by the traditions of suffrage and socialism. What it lacks are true coordinated market forces that require transparent sharing of information to create or destroy employer brand value. Think of it, who would invest in a company that did not issue its annual reports? Who would buy a product from a company that refused to list the ingredients of the product? Why is it that the job market alone should be allowed to obscure itself behind clouds of confidentiality between employer and employee agreements? I would like the question, who would take a job at a company that does not publicly disclose its employment benefits, values, etc., to have the same resonance and effect as my prior two propositions.
Desprefirme does not portend to be the great and good mover of corporate identity. We act as the level playing field for employees to air their views about the job market in a way that communicates the positive features and short comings of employment opportunities in Romania. Our goal is greater transparency in the social employment contract and increased distribution of information throughout the job market to make it more equitable. Thus, we feel that more disclosure has to be one of our goals.
In any event, this brute belief in pure capitalism (preeminence of the opinion of the client) by a new managerial and professional class in Romania is dangerous. Transplanting a superficial free market veneer from the West has only allowed the reinforcement of a clearly stratified class structure in Eastern Europe. It is a shame that a younger generation has adopted absolutely this world view. It has entrenched the pre-89 hierarchy in exchange for a laisse-faire environment in which a non-competitive parallel class structure may evolve. While we see friction and rivalry between these factions, neither represent true reform nor change for Romania, as neither has at its heart an agenda of sustainable investment for a more prosperous and a more sociably mobile (read, more equitable) Romanian society.
USER:
I’m sure that names should remain confidential, managers’ included. I think that an employee’s employment record could indicate his identity. Unlike the site’s name, I think there should exist despreangajati.com. The moral problem that appears is that, unlike companies that create a reputation less or more positive through this site, the individuals would burst out if they were treated like that. I think that the same thing will happen when you’ll post managers’ names who are already easier to identify than the employees and who are not very happy to be treated unequaly.
Is it equitable what DespreFirme.com is doing ?
In the end, the most important opinion of a corporation belongs to its clients and not to its employees, managers or owners.
