Creating a stable environment that promotes achievement, unity, and personality is essential to successful workplaces.
創(chuàng)造一個能促進成功、團結一致和個性發(fā)展的穩(wěn)定的工作環(huán)境，對于一家成功的公司來說至關重要。
?
It’s tough to hold on to good employees, but it shouldn’t be. Most of the mistakes that companies make are easily avoided. When you do make mistakes, your best employees are the first to go, because they have the most options.
留住優(yōu)秀員工看似很難，實則非然。因為其中的大部分錯誤，公司在管理員工時是能夠避免的。一旦管理者犯了錯誤時，最好的員工往往是第一個離去，因為他們有更多的選擇。
?
If you can’t keep your best employees engaged, you can’t keep your best employees. While this should be common sense, it isn’t common enough. A survey by CEB found that one-third of star employees feel disengaged from their employer and are already looking for a new job.
如果公司無法讓好員工全身心投入到工作中來，那公司就留不住好員工。雖然這理應是常識，但仍有很多人不知道。美國高階主管領導顧問公司CEB的一項調查發(fā)現(xiàn)，三分之一的優(yōu)秀員工感覺與雇主格格不入，已開始另謀出路。
?
When you lose good employees, they don’t disengage all at once. Instead, their interest in their jobs slowly dissipates. Michael Kibler, who has spent much of his career studying this phenomenon, refers to it as brownout. Like dying stars, star employees slowly lose their fire for their jobs.
優(yōu)秀員工的離職并非突如其來。相反，他們會先對工作慢慢失去熱情。邁克爾·卡布勒（Michael Kibler）曾多年來致力于研究這一現(xiàn)象，他把優(yōu)秀員工失去工作興趣的階段稱為“電力減弱”。像垂暮之星一樣，優(yōu)秀員工會慢慢地失去工作的熱情。
?
“Brownout is different from burnout because workers afflicted by it are not in obvious crisis,” Kibler said. “They seem to be performing fine: putting in massive hours, grinding out work while contributing to teams, and saying all the right things in meetings. However, they are operating in a silent state of continual overwhelm, and the predictable consequence is disengagement.”
“電力減弱與倦怠不同，電力減弱的員工常常沒有明顯的危機感?！?卡布勒（Kibler）說，“電力減弱的員工，表現(xiàn)似乎都很良好：投入大量的時間，努力工作，同時為團隊作出貢獻，并在會議中說出表現(xiàn)得體。但他們總有種提不起勁的感覺，最終就會選擇離職。
?
In order to prevent brownout and to retain top talent, companies and managers must understand what they’re doing that contributes to this slow fade. The following practices are the worst offenders, and they must be abolished if you’re going to hang on to good employees.
為了防止電力減弱并留住頂尖人才，公司和管理人員必須了解他們的哪些行為使得員工的興趣在慢性枯萎。以下的做法是最令優(yōu)秀員工忍無可忍的，如果想留住好員工，公司就必須避免出現(xiàn)這些問題。
?
1. They make a lot of stupid rules. Companies need to have rules—that’s a given—but they don’t have to be shortsighted and lazy attempts at creating order. Whether it’s an overzealous attendance policy or taking employees’ frequent flier miles, even a couple of unnecessary rules can drive people crazy. When good employees feel like big brother is watching, they’ll find someplace else to work.
1. 制定一大堆愚蠢的規(guī)則。公司當然要有規(guī)章制度——這是理所當然的——但萬不可制定目光短淺、教條式的規(guī)章制度。無論是過于嚴格的考勤制度還是私吞員工的累計飛行里程，甚至是一些不必要的規(guī)則，都可能讓人抓狂。優(yōu)秀員工若是覺得自己在公司受到監(jiān)視了，也將會寧可換個地方工作。
?
2. They treat everyone equally. While this tactic works with school children, the workplace ought to function differently. Treating everyone equally shows your top performers that no matter how high they perform (and, typically, top performers are work horses), they will be treated the same as the bozo who does nothing more than punch the clock.
2. 無差別對待員工。 雖然這種策略適用于學校教育，卻不宜用在工作場所。如果老板對待所有員工都一樣，而不管他們表現(xiàn)有多好（優(yōu)秀員工通常都是公司主力），他們就會覺得做再好也和平庸者每天打卡所獲得的一樣。
?
3. They tolerate poor performance. It’s said that in jazz bands, the band is only as good as the worst player; no matter how great some members may be, everyone hears the worst player. The same goes for a company. When you permit weak links to exist without consequence, they drag everyone else down, especially your top performers.
3. 容忍員工的爛表現(xiàn)。 據(jù)說在爵士樂隊中，樂隊的好壞取決于那個最差的樂手。無論其他樂手多么優(yōu)秀，觀眾聽到的都是最差樂手的演奏。公司亦然。當公司默許表現(xiàn)很爛的員工存在，而不計任何后果時，他們會拖累所有人，尤其是最出色的員工。
?
4. They don’t recognize accomplishments. It’s easy to underestimate the power of a pat on the back, especially with top performers who are intrinsically motivated. Everyone likes kudos, none more so than those who work hard and give their all. Rewarding individual accomplishments shows that you’re paying attention. Managers need to communicate with their people to find out what makes them feel good (for some, it’s a raise; for others, it’s public recognition) and then to reward them for a job well done. With top performers, this will happen often if you’re doing it right.
4. 不獎勵任何成就。人們很容易低估在背部輕拍一下的力量，特別是對內(nèi)在驅動的優(yōu)秀員工來說。每個人都喜歡被稱贊，那些辛勤工作、努力奉獻的人更是這樣。獎勵個人成就則表明你正在關注他們。管理人員需要與員工溝通，從而發(fā)現(xiàn)什么形式的獎勵最能鼓舞士氣，然后獎勵他們做好工作（對某些人來說，獎勵的形式最好是加薪；而對其他人來說，公眾的認可更能鼓舞他們好好工作）。對于表現(xiàn)出眾的員工而言，如果公司能處理得當，這一現(xiàn)象將會經(jīng)常發(fā)生。
?
5. They don’t care about people. More than half the people who leave their jobs do so because of their relationship with their boss. Smart companies make certain that their managers know how to balance being professional with being human. These are the bosses who celebrate their employees’ successes, empathize with those going through hard times, and challenge them, even when it hurts. Bosses who fail to really care will always have high turnover rates. It’s impossible to work for someone for eight-plus hours a day when they aren’t personally involved and don’t care about anything other than your output.
5. 不在乎員工感受。 一半以上的員工選擇離職，是因為與老板的關系相處不好。聰明的公司會確保他們的管理人員知道如何做到既專業(yè)又不乏人情味。這類管理者會為員工取得的成功感到自豪，理解員工的難處，同時也會讓員工接受各種挑戰(zhàn)，哪怕這個過程會痛苦。老板不會真正關心，總是會有很高的更替率。如果老板從不真正關心員工，那么其手下的人員流動就會比較高。沒有人愿意將每天的8個多小時奉獻給只知發(fā)號施令、只關心業(yè)績的老板。
?
6. They don’t show people the big picture. It may seem efficient to simply send employees assignments and move on, but leaving out the big picture is a deal breaker for star performers. Star performers shoulder heavier loads because they genuinely care about their work, so their work must have a purpose. When they don’t know what that is, they feel alienated and aimless. When they aren’t given a purpose, they find one elsewhere.
6. 不為員工描述公司的發(fā)展藍圖。不停給員工分配任務，這樣做似乎效率很高。然而，對優(yōu)秀員工而言，不清楚公司的藍圖，可能成為他們離職的主要原因。優(yōu)秀員工愿意承擔更大的工作量，是因為真心在意自己的工作，因此這些工作必須有價值。他們?nèi)绻恢榔鋬r值何在，就會產(chǎn)生疏離感，覺得漫無方向。他們在這家公司感受不到自我價值，就會去別處尋找價值。
?
7. They don’t let people pursue their passions. Google mandates that employees spend at least 20% of their time doing “what they believe will benefit Google most.” While these passion projects make major contributions to marquis Google products, such as Gmail and AdSense, their biggest impact is in creating highly engaged Googlers. Talented employees are passionate. Providing opportunities for them to pursue their passions improves their productivity and job satisfaction, but many managers want people to work within a little box. These managers fear that productivity will decline if they let people expand their focus and pursue their passions. This fear is unfounded. Studies have shown that people who are able to pursue their passions at work experience flow, a euphoric state of mind that is five times more productive than the norm.
7. 不讓員工追求自己喜歡的東西。谷歌公司規(guī)定員工投入至少20%的時間去做“自認為最有益于谷歌的事”。這些興趣愛好的項目催生了優(yōu)秀的谷歌產(chǎn)品，如谷歌郵箱和廣告聯(lián)盟，但其最大的作用是培養(yǎng)了高度專注的谷歌員工。才能出眾的員工往往滿懷熱忱。讓這些員工有機會追求自己的愛好，可以提高他們的工作效率和對工作的滿意度，但很多管理者卻把員工的工作范圍限制在一個小空間里。這類管理者擔憂，如果讓員工擴大注意力范圍，追求自己的興趣愛好，他們的效率就會降低。這種擔憂純屬多余。研究表明，如果員工能夠在工作中追求自己的愛好，其大腦會一直處于興奮狀態(tài)，而此時的效率是正常效率的五倍。
?
8. They don’t make things fun. If people aren’t having fun at work, then you’re doing it wrong. People don’t give their all if they aren’t having fun, and fun is a major protector against brownout. The best companies to work for know the importance of letting employees loosen up a little. Google, for example, does just about everything it can to make work fun—free meals, bowling allies, and fitness classes, to name a few. The idea is simple: if work is fun, you’ll not only perform better, but you’ll stick around for longer hours and an even longer career.
8. 工作毫無樂趣。如果員工覺得工作很無聊，這就是管理者的問題。員工不愉快，就無法全身心投入到工作當中。樂趣是抵抗“電力減弱”的主要力量。好公司都會清楚一點：讓員工適當放松很重要。例如，谷歌公司竭盡所能讓工作變得有趣，如免費用餐、保齡球場和健身課程等等。谷歌這樣做的意圖很簡單：如果工作很有趣，員工不僅會表現(xiàn)得更好，而且會愿意工作更長時間，甚至會以此作為長久的事業(yè)。
?
Bringing It All Together
總而言之
?
Managers tend to blame their turnover problems on everything under the sun while ignoring the crux of the matter: people don’t leave jobs; they leave managers.
面對員工流動問題，管理者往往怨天尤人，卻忽略了問題的癥結所在——員工其實并不是離開工作，而是離開老板。
?

聲明：本雙語文章的中文翻譯系滬江英語原創(chuàng)內(nèi)容，轉載請注明出處。中文翻譯僅代表譯者個人觀點，僅供參考。如有不妥之處，歡迎指正。