There is ample bibliography and information on the management of the Family Business, but everything published refers to the direction and the relationship between the members of the family.
Almost nothing has been studied on the problem of Human Resources in the Family Business, those who work in the company without being family members or shareholders.
Working in this type of organization has some advantages and several disadvantages, which increase or decrease depending on the degree of professionalization of the company's management.
The advantages frequently expressed by the workers of an RU are:
• Trust
• Familiar trade
• Relationship with bosses and owners
• Little or no bureaucracy
• Quick decisions
But when the management comes into conflict, these are reflected in the workers and influence the work environment and, as a consequence, their performance and contribution.
As in everything that we talk about companies and especially EF, we insist on the absence of recipes, we never generalize, when we say that in most companies things are a certain way, we do not say "in all companies", each company it is unique and each family is unique.
In order to frame this work, we are going to list the problems that are generated in the human resources of a RU when the usual tools are not used to avoid the most common sources of conflict in this type of organization.
These sources are:
• Lack of a shared vision
• Absence of governing bodies
• Lack of planning of the succession process
• Crisis of each stage of growth
These four causes of conflicts were extensively studied, but always in relation to the problems they generate among family members and in the effective management of the company, from the management. Never explaining the consequences of these in the personnel of the organization.
This job is based on the consulting work experience of various family businesses.
We will present the most common problems that arise before, during and after using the tools to reduce the inconvenience.
Shared vision
Before:
The lack of a shared vision generates, in the family members who work, differences in terms of culture and ways of leading the staff.
As we explained, each family member feels like an owner and has their own vision of the company, and each one feels that they are doing their best, and in reality they are doing it, but for “their” company, not for everyone's.
This generates differences of opinion and cultures.
Then the staff meet several superiors each with different leadership styles, and with different cultures, so they are continually receiving contradictory indications.
Having no direction, there are no career plans or salary policy
In addition, by not knowing the vision of the company, since it is not declared, it is impossible for him to contribute ideas or feel part of a team, he limits himself to following orders, doing what he is told. As in military organizations, the last order is the one that counts, and the only way to survive is to be noticed as little as possible.
The consequences of not defining a shared vision are reflected in:
• Contradictory orders
• Different cultures
• Lack of input of ideas
• Routine work
• Unnoticed
• Uncertain future
• Random reward
• Lack of clear rules
After
Defining a vision aligns and orders the goals and culture of all those who lead.
This is transmitted in the alignment of staff, knowing the objectives can contribute ideas and propose improvements in the task.
Feel that you are a ship bound.
By defining the vision, the culture of the organization is defined in itself, so everyone knows that it is rewarded and punished.
It notably reduces conflicts between leaders, which is transmitted in an improvement in the working environment.
Governing bodies
Before
The absence of the governing bodies generates the mixture of objectives and needs between the family and the company.
Responsibilities are not defined, which means that everyone does everything and at the same time is responsible for everyone, and this implies that no one is responsible for anything.
Family problems are transferred to the company, which influences the general work environment.
By not defining objectives of each system, the result of the work is not rewarded, if not the attitude of the worker, the one who seems to work a lot is rewarded and not the one who achieves the best results.
The areas and those responsible for each one are not defined, so the staff has more than one superior.
The consequences of not defining governing bodies are:
• Undefined responsibilities
• Little orientation to results
• Family problems
• Work climate problems
• Lack of clear objectives
• Many bosses
After
The definition and implementation of the management control mechanisms requires defined responsibilities, results orientation, and rewards and punishments according to the fulfillment of objectives.
Each one is responsible for an area, which generates a defined line of authority.
This reduces family problems, which influences the work environment.
The succession
Before
Succession is one of the most conflictive stages in the life of EFs. If it is not addressed from the beginning of the company, as a necessary process that must be managed as part of the business, it generates difficulties in the entire structure of the organization.
The one who leaves is in conflict, as he must leave his job and start a new life.
The successor comes into conflict, as he must assume new responsibilities.
The family comes into conflict, since its members are going through a moment of crisis that affects relationships.
All personnel are in conflict because:
• Change the leadership style
• Changes the culture of the company
• Uncertainty about the new manager / s
• Lack of information on new objectives
On the other hand, the succession process also generates disappointment about the future since, normally, the succession falls on the close relatives of the managers, which puts a limit to the career, especially of the middle managers.
During
Succession is a process and, as such, it must be planned and carried out over a long period of time.
For it to develop efficiently, the company's staff must be involved in it.
If he participates in the election and preparation of the successor, they reduce uncertainty and feel taken into account.
This involvement is felt, especially by older staff, as a rebirth of the company of which they are a part, just as they felt when they worked alongside the previous generation.
Growth stages
Companies are complex systems that depend on an infinity of variables (market in which it is developed, legal form, culture of the founders, vision, values, etc.), so it is very difficult to generalize as to which behaviors and strategies are the right ones. The same problem is solved in each organization differently and generally with good results in all.
But all, as they grow, go through stages of evolution that are very similar in most. Just as people go through childhood, adolescence, maturity and old age, and in each of these stages they behave and think differently, and each one arrives at different times, the same happens with organizations, with the only difference that companies, if transformed correctly, can outlive their founders.
In each of the stages, change occurs as a consequence of a crisis, and this can be more or less short, or more or less traumatic, if the reasons that produce it are known and there is guidance on the first actions to take. carry out.
Depending on the culture prevailing in the organization, if it is proactive or reactive, actions can be taken before the crisis occurs, or once it is triggered, knowing the causes, taking it more calmly and with less anxiety and making the necessary changes.
At each stage, along with organizational changes, the leadership and culture of the company must evolve, and these may be sought after objectives or emerging behaviors as a consequence of the crisis, and, many times, both., where the changes influence the crisis and it is this that produces the changes.
First stage - Entrepreneurial stage
The founder accompanied by a generally small group of highly motivated collaborators solves all the problems that appear. Everything is new, the energy level is very high. This stage is also known as CREATIVE CHAOS, everyone does everything, everyone knows where they are going, each one can solve almost without asking how they know the Vision, the north.
Strict control is not necessary because the company is small and easy to manage.
The staff are usually motivated and provide solutions, there are hardly any hierarchies, everyone lines up behind the founder.
Second stage - crisis symptoms
The number of people increases, and the new ones do not receive the communication because they are all very busy. These begin to work without a global Vision, but with a lot of energy and then a ROUTINE subculture is generated, these new ones cannot solve many of the problems that arise. There's no time to think. The Manager has to take care of everything, he cannot delegate, a little because he does not know how and a little because the personnel who do not have the Vision do not solve anything without asking.
The feeling that controls are missing begins, the information generated is not enough, everything depends on the Manager, who, logically, cannot be in everything.
The enthusiasm falls and the owners of the staff begin to separate.
At this stage, management should begin to “professionalize”, generate middle managers and begin to incorporate personnel with experience in strategic areas that are expanding in size and previously led by the owner.
Third stage - Kingdoms
Generally at this stage, crises are caused by changes in the environment when the Manager could not fully delegate the operational wheel and dedicate himself to management from outside of it.
If the necessary changes were not made in the second stage, the company continuously works to solve problems.
Staff are demotivated and have no contact with managers or clear strategic objectives, they limit themselves to doing what they are told and try to cover themselves and not be responsible for problems.
When the children of the founder enter the kingdoms appear where each one tries to manage according to their own culture and the symptoms of the first source of conflict appear, the lack of a shared vision.
Middle management
I would like to make a special mention of the characteristics of the problems of middle management in PE.
In my experience, company founders (entrepreneurs) are hard-working and are capable of creating a company where there was nothing before.
But he has the characteristic that he does everything himself, he has serious difficulties in delegating and, normally, he wants things to be done, if someone else does it, exactly as he does. This means that you are never satisfied with the work of others.
This characteristic, which is essential in the creative stage, becomes a burden when the company grows.
In general, entrepreneurs surround themselves with submissive personnel with little contribution of ideas, they are the ones who do not argue and do what they are told.
If the entrepreneur does not become a businessman, the destiny of middle managers is to accept and do what they are ordered to do without questioning or contributing, which is the way to survive.
The entrepreneur has to learn to delegate and control the results of the task, concentrate more on what, than on how.
If this change is not made, the employer himself is the one who slows the growth of the company.
