Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business October 8, 2024 18:05 Beijing The following article is from the Economic Observer, author Liu Jin Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, once said: "Being responsible for the organization can affect the organization's operating res

Liu Jin

Professor of Accounting and Finance, Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business

Director of Investment Research Center

Responsibility is a person's commitment to others . When we say that people should take responsibility, we are actually emphasizing that this person should fulfill his commitments. Among them, "others" can be as small as an individual, or it can be an organization, a group of people, a family, a company, a country or the entire world.

promises can be explicit or implicit . When a person joins a society, he needs to sign a membership agreement and promise to abide by the rules of the society; when a person joins a company, he needs to sign a labor agreement and abide by the company's rules and regulations. These are explicit commitments.

There is no contract to sign between the society and the company's culture, but it must be abided by. These are implicit promises. When a couple decides to have a child and the child is born, the parents naturally make the commitment to raise the child. This is a rule of society and a natural rule. When a company sells goods to consumers, the goods may not necessarily bring benefits to consumers, but they must ensure that they will not cause harm to consumers. These are also implicit promises. With a promise comes a responsibility to fulfill it.

It is important to take responsibility. Failure to be responsible will not only harm the party being promised, but also break the rules. Taking responsibility is still the basis of trust. If everyone is responsible, trust will arise between people; if many people are not responsible, commitments will not be binding, trust will be lost among people, collaboration will be impossible, and organizations and society will collapse.

generally has explicit or implicit punishment mechanisms.

For explicit commitment , the punishment mechanism is generally explicit. For example, if a person violates the rules of the society, the society can expel him or her. If the company's labor agreement is violated, the company can demote, reduce salary, deduct bonuses, or even fire the offending employee.

If you violate the implicit promise , the punishment mechanism can be social condemnation and exclusion, or it can be the use of legal means to punish violations. For example, if parents give birth to a child but do not raise it with all their heart, they will be judged morally by relatives, friends, and neighbors. If a company's products cause harm to consumers, consumers will condemn and retaliate against the company in public opinion, and may even use legal means to defend their rights.

In addition to punishment from the outside, some irresponsible behaviors will also trigger punishment from people's hearts. Loss, regret, self-blame, depression, and emptiness are all extremely painful emotions, often as painful as physical punishment or financial loss.

Regardless of the source of these negative feelings, the result is a higher level of restraint on people. Discipline from the outside can only be directed at observable behavior and speech, but discipline from within can be directed at thoughts. Even if a person is not irresponsible in words and deeds or breaks promises, just having this kind of thought can trigger emotional punishment and make people feel "guilty."

With internal and external punishment mechanisms, people have a strong motivation to take responsibility and fulfill their commitments. But responsibility comes at a cost. In order to be responsible, one must spend time, money, influence, and emotional investment.

However, everyone only has 24 hours in a day, and all these resources are limited. When resources are allocated to this thing, the corresponding allocation to other things will be reduced. Whether you are an ordinary person with average ability or a social elite with strong ability, you must make a balance when facing various responsibilities in life. It is impossible for one person to do everything well. He can only do most things well in balance and pursue the ultimate in efficiency.

Therefore, when a person takes responsibility, it is natural to consider the value brought by fulfilling the promise. This valuation must take into account short- and long-term factors, both external and internal factors.

Thus, People weigh three variables when considering responsibility: the value of being responsible, the cost of being responsible, and the penalty of not being responsible.

When the value is greater than the cost, taking responsibility is a very simple matter and everyone will take responsibility. When the value is lower than the cost, people's first instinct is to avoid responsibility, but at the same time they have to compare it with the punishment of irresponsibility. If the punishment is greater than the cost, the person concerned will choose to take responsibility despite his reluctance, thereby avoiding being punished. If the penalty is less than the cost, the parties are likely to choose to avoid responsibility and accept the penalty at the same time.

From the perspective of the intensity of punishment, law is greater than morality, and morality is greater than culture. Therefore, there are very few people who break the law, more people who violate moral standards, and even more people who conflict with the mainstream culture of society.

The above analysis shows that no one is perfect. As long as the conditions are met, everyone has the possibility of evading responsibility.

The trick is that we need to realize that not all commitments are immutable and rigid (such as obeying the law) but can be chosen and adjusted. When choosing a commitment, people can transform the perspective of others and society into their own perspective, start from the cost they can afford, and use the cost to decide or modify the commitment. This can ensure that the condition that the value is greater than the cost is established in the long term.

These are all wrong practices. The root cause is that they regard responsibility as a rigid goal, thus ignoring the variability and adjustability of responsibility.

The correct approach is to lay out all your resources, allocate resources according to the different values ​​of each thing, and match responsibilities one-to-one with the allocated resources. The final result of must not be perfect. It will not satisfy everyone, and it may also dissatisfy everyone. But to get the best results, to do better, people need resources beyond their capabilities.

Therefore, man’s real responsibility is to do what he can. Others may have high expectations, but your responsibility is only what you commit to. To do what they can, people must measure their own abilities, communicate the measurement results with others, and choose responsibilities that are within their capabilities. Such a person is a person who keeps his word, is responsible, is at ease internally, and is trustworthy externally.

The pictures in this article are from Tuchong Creative. Reprinting requires authorization.

Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, once said: “Being responsible for an organization means being able to The person who affects the organization's operating results is the manager. "A good manager not only needs to pay attention to the quality of products and services, but also needs to have a responsible mindset and dare to take responsibility for the team and the organization.

Responsibility is not only a commitment to customers, but also a commitment to employees, shareholders and even society. Fulfilling responsibilities can not only enhance the company's reputation and brand value, but also bring long-term benefits to the company.

However, with limited resources, how companies can make wise responsible choices and how to achieve sustainable development while balancing the interests of all parties is a question that every entrepreneur needs to think about.

Professor Liu Jin of Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business discussed the concept, mechanism and variability of responsibility in his latest signed article. He pointed out that people will weigh three variables when considering responsibility: the value of taking responsibility, the cost of taking responsibility, and the punishment of irresponsibility; not all promises are unchanging and rigid, and people Real responsibility is to do the best you can.

Author | Liu Jin

Source | Economic Observer

Liu Jin

Professor of Accounting and Finance, Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business

Director of Investment Research Center

Responsibility is a person's commitment to others . When we say that people should take responsibility, we are actually emphasizing that this person should fulfill his commitments. Among them, "others" can be as small as an individual, or it can be an organization, a group of people, a family, a company, a country or the entire world.

promises can be explicit or implicit . When a person joins a society, he needs to sign a membership agreement and promise to abide by the rules of the society; when a person joins a company, he needs to sign a labor agreement and abide by the company's rules and regulations. These are explicit commitments.

There is no contract to sign between the society and the company's culture, but it must be abided by. These are implicit promises. When a couple decides to have a child and the child is born, the parents naturally make the commitment to raise the child. This is a rule of society and a natural rule. When a company sells goods to consumers, the goods may not necessarily bring benefits to consumers, but they must ensure that they will not cause harm to consumers. These are also implicit promises. With a promise comes a responsibility to fulfill it.

It is important to take responsibility. Failure to be responsible will not only harm the party being promised, but also break the rules. Taking responsibility is still the basis of trust. If everyone is responsible, trust will arise between people; if many people are not responsible, commitments will not be binding, trust will be lost among people, collaboration will be impossible, and organizations and society will collapse.

The responsible mechanism

What will happen if someone is not responsible?

generally has explicit or implicit punishment mechanisms.

For explicit commitment , the punishment mechanism is generally explicit. For example, if a person violates the rules of the society, the society can expel him or her. If the company's labor agreement is violated, the company can demote, reduce salary, deduct bonuses, or even fire the offending employee.

If you violate the implicit promise , the punishment mechanism can be social condemnation and exclusion, or it can be the use of legal means to punish violations. For example, if parents give birth to a child but do not raise it with all their heart, they will be judged morally by relatives, friends, and neighbors. If a company's products cause harm to consumers, consumers will condemn and retaliate against the company in public opinion, and may even use legal means to defend their rights.

In addition to punishment from the outside, some irresponsible behaviors will also trigger punishment from people's hearts. Loss, regret, self-blame, depression, and emptiness are all extremely painful emotions, often as painful as physical punishment or financial loss.

When a person cannot take responsibility, it often triggers these inner negative emotions. These emotions can come from animal instincts, such as deep emotional investment in relatives and friends, which is a very strong implicit commitment. Therefore, once a loved one cannot help them out when they are in trouble, this situation will often cause people to have various negative emotions.

Another situation where emotions arise or through education is that people have internalized social morals and values. When they fail to abide by social rules, it will naturally trigger strong inner punishment. When we say that a person is "stricken by conscience," we are referring to this inner punishment.

Regardless of the source of these negative feelings, the result is a higher level of restraint on people. Discipline from the outside can only be directed at observable behavior and speech, but discipline from within can be directed at thoughts. Even if a person is not irresponsible in words and deeds or breaks promises, just having this kind of thought can trigger emotional punishment and make people feel "guilty."

With internal and external punishment mechanisms, people have a strong motivation to take responsibility and fulfill their commitments. But responsibility comes at a cost. In order to be responsible, one must spend time, money, influence, and emotional investment.

However, everyone only has 24 hours in a day, and all these resources are limited. When resources are allocated to this thing, the corresponding allocation to other things will be reduced. Whether you are an ordinary person with average ability or a social elite with strong ability, you must make a balance when facing various responsibilities in life. It is impossible for one person to do everything well. He can only do most things well in balance and pursue the ultimate in efficiency.

Therefore, when a person takes responsibility, it is natural to consider the value brought by fulfilling the promise. This valuation must take into account short- and long-term factors, both external and internal factors.

For example, if an employee receives a task to solve a company problem at work, there may be no economic benefit in the short term, but it may bring long-term growth opportunities, which is of great value. For another example, the same task has neither short-term nor long-term economic benefits, but if exercise can make people more confident and courageous, this is also a value that cannot be ignored.

Variability of Responsibility

Thus, People weigh three variables when considering responsibility: the value of being responsible, the cost of being responsible, and the penalty of not being responsible.

When the value is greater than the cost, taking responsibility is a very simple matter and everyone will take responsibility. When the value is lower than the cost, people's first instinct is to avoid responsibility, but at the same time they have to compare it with the punishment of irresponsibility. If the punishment is greater than the cost, the person concerned will choose to take responsibility despite his reluctance, thereby avoiding being punished. If the penalty is less than the cost, the parties are likely to choose to avoid responsibility and accept the penalty at the same time.

From the perspective of the intensity of punishment, law is greater than morality, and morality is greater than culture. Therefore, there are very few people who break the law, more people who violate moral standards, and even more people who conflict with the mainstream culture of society.

The above analysis shows that no one is perfect. As long as the conditions are met, everyone has the possibility of evading responsibility.

So, for a long-termist, is it possible to be responsible and keep promises in most cases? The answer is possible.

The trick is that we need to realize that not all commitments are immutable and rigid (such as obeying the law) but can be chosen and adjusted. When choosing a commitment, people can transform the perspective of others and society into their own perspective, start from the cost they can afford, and use the cost to decide or modify the commitment. This can ensure that the condition that the value is greater than the cost is established in the long term.

For example, if we see someone drowning, it is our responsibility to save the person, but not to save him or her is to evade responsibility. But jumping into the water if you can't swim is obviously not a way to take responsibility, because the cost of using your life to fulfill your responsibilities is too high.

The correct approach is to use all other methods to save others without jumping into the water yourself. Here, the cost of taking on the responsibility of saving people is not your own life, but other costs that you can afford. This compromise approach is obviously better than risking your life by jumping into the water, or simply giving up trying to save people.

For another example, many people are middle-aged, some are old and some are young, and they still have heavy work. Under the weight of such multiple responsibilities, some people realize that the cost of fulfilling all responsibilities is too high and choose to lie down. Some people try to do everything 100%, but pay a high price such as health.

These are all wrong practices. The root cause is that they regard responsibility as a rigid goal, thus ignoring the variability and adjustability of responsibility.

The correct approach is to lay out all your resources, allocate resources according to the different values ​​of each thing, and match responsibilities one-to-one with the allocated resources. The final result of must not be perfect. It will not satisfy everyone, and it may also dissatisfy everyone. But to get the best results, to do better, people need resources beyond their capabilities.

Therefore, man’s real responsibility is to do what he can. Others may have high expectations, but your responsibility is only what you commit to. To do what they can, people must measure their own abilities, communicate the measurement results with others, and choose responsibilities that are within their capabilities. Such a person is a person who keeps his word, is responsible, is at ease internally, and is trustworthy externally.

The pictures in this article are from Tuchong Creative. Reprinting requires authorization.