Thinking of this, the doorman couldn't help but curl the corners of his lips proudly, and said with a secret smile: "That's right. It is only at this time that the role of the team will really be revealed, but at the same time, the shortcomings of the team will also be revealed. Although the team has only been established for a long time, and there are not many people in the team that have appeared.

However, after the emergence of these teams, the problems exposed are enough to represent the teams that appear later. So, in a way, it's actually a good thing. Because, even if a new team emerges, as long as it can't come up with new problems, it's better not to appear.

But this is obviously impossible. Normally, those teams will emerge one after the other, but there are almost no teams that are willing to be role models for others, or to provide valuable experience to other teams. People are selfish, and teams are even more so.

As long as it's a team, it's actually a collection of selfish ghosts. They don't come together to make a profit with everyone, but on the contrary, they want to use the team for their own benefit, and there is a reason why they say it so high-soundingly.

And this reason is that you can't let others know about these things, or even if you let others know, you must never let others know how much they have. For example, if A and B join the team at the same time, the general understanding is that the boss, who is the head of the group, will give them the same treatment.

Of course. There is a premise, that is, the strength of the two people is at the same level, that is, they are not equal, if there is a gap in the strength of the two people, then it is obviously unreasonable to give the same reward. Moreover, it is also illogical. Because, the strength of two people is obviously one strong and the other weak.

If you give the same amount of money to a strong person as a weak person, the strong person will definitely not be motivated. In this case, there will definitely be contradictions, so how can the two of them cooperate? Let alone cooperate. There is even a question of whether the two of them can stay in the team for a long time. Most of them will leave with a hard time.

Therefore, in order to avoid this situation, as long as it is a normal regiment leader, the money will be distributed unequally, so that everyone can live a good life. Also, it can maintain harmony this way. Anyway, that person is strong, he gets paid well, and that weak person will not have any opinion.

On the contrary, if it is the other way around, it is not possible at all. On the other hand, if you give money like this, it will only make the strong person feel dissatisfied, and the weak person will also feel a burden in his heart, thinking that I am so weak, but I have been paid so much. Am I really up to the task?

Or rather, I won't be suspected of having a personal relationship with the regimental commander if I get paid so much? Because, the more it happens, the more entangled it will be, and the more difficult it will be to explain clearly, even if the strength of the weak person in the end becomes stronger, it will be useless.

However, these situations are not in the scope of consideration this time, so I don't need to delve too deep. If it really doesn't work, and I have to consider this situation, it's still too late for me to dig deeper. All right. Let's not think about these things for a moment, but let's go back to the topic just now.

That is to say, when two people enter the team together, if the strength of these two people is exactly the same, they are almost exactly the same twins, and there is no difference in height. The personalities are the same and easy to get along with, the family background is similar, and even the age is about the same, will the head of the regiment really give these two people exactly the same salary?

Not necessarily. In other words, if these two people are given the same salary, then it will only be a mediocre regiment leader. Because, this shows that this regiment leader is a brainless person. If you are a person with brains, it is impossible to support this method in any case.

Because, if this approach is really supported, then the consequences will be unimaginable. The two of them will definitely not have any opinions at first, but when time gradually passes and the performance of the two of them becomes bigger and bigger, one of them will definitely have an opinion.

Therefore, in this case, there will inevitably be one party who will ask for a salary increase. If you do, of course, there is no problem, but there is also a degree, that is, if you keep being asked to keep complying with it, it will only make the person who has not raised his salary chill in the end.

On the other hand, if you don't raise your salary all the time, it's actually not good. This will chill the stronger person's heart. He must have thought so. I've been working hard for him for so long, and I'm not without grades, on the contrary, my grades are very good.

However, he refused to give me a raise. Why? Is it because I guess the colleague who came in with me? Absolutely not. That colleague is not related to the head of the regiment, and I have already investigated it. How could the head of the regiment care about him?

If you care about him, you will definitely care about me. After all, he is human, and I am also human. Am he human and I am not human? It's ridiculous. As a regimental commander, it is impossible to make such a mistake. What's more, if he was going to take care of that weakling, why not take care of the other weaklings in the team?

Now that I've been on the team for so long, I'm not the weakest, and my colleague isn't the weakest. Although his grades are not as ideal as mine, his strength is not as strong as mine, and his progress speed is not as fast as mine, but in any case, he is not at the bottom.

It's just that the level elsewhere is lower than mine. In that case, why did the regimental commander choose to look for him instead of someone lower than him? Could it be that the regimental commander had a soft spot for him? He fell in love with him? It is impossible. It's absolutely impossible. The head of the regiment is a sweetheart. Moreover, if this was the case, I would have found out the clue a long time ago, and it is impossible that there will be no trace of it for so long.

And as long as there are traces, I can't find them, and I'm not blind. Of course. Maybe it's because the regiment commander's hiding skills are too powerful, and he is very good at concealment, but he is very well hidden, and my colleague can't do it. That colleague should be exposed.

But what was the result? After all this time, he was not exposed. If it hasn't been exposed, how can it be true? It must be fake. There are also only fake ones that can explain some situations that cannot be explained in the past. Of course. There's really not much point in arguing about that now.

The most important thing is to figure out what is the best way to not only make the person who is more capable ask for a salary increase, but also to make the person who is less able feel at ease when he gets his salary? The best way is to talk to the two of them secretly. That's right, and, after the conversation, in order to avoid the two of them asking about their respective salaries in private, they should deliberately make their salaries unequal.

Therefore, the best way to do this is to first make the salaries of these two people one higher and one low, one more and one less. In order to do this, it is not possible for each of them to know their salary first, and it is necessary to decide the salary through the content of the conversation with the head of the regiment.

So, according to this logic, two conversations can be made. And the most important thing to complete these two conversations is not to let others know that I have arranged two conversations, but only to let them know that I have only arranged one, and this conversation is not for the other party, but for them.

As long as the idea can be successfully implemented, it is very convenient. Just talk to them. As for the content, it is more simple and convenient. In any case, I'm going to have to set up two scenes to talk. Well, now that it has been decided. It is not difficult to implement it next, but it is difficult to do it in order, that is, it is better to start the interview first.

If I have a strong person in person, it will be beneficial, I can ask him to raise the price first, and listen to his thoughts first, and then when I am faced with a similar situation, there will be a difference of one kind or another. And it's with the difference that I can make a better decision.

However, if nothing else, the probability that the stronger person will be arranged to meet first should be only one percent. The reason is also very simple, as long as I meet the weak person first, then I can let the strong person see the salary that the weak person wants, so that as long as I try my best to lower the price with the weak person first, then the money I give will be less.

That couldn't be better. After all, strong people will ask for a price increase, but if the transaction price is kept very low from the beginning, what does it matter if it is given him a little increase? It doesn't matter at all. If that's not the case, it's just going to make others trouble.

In other words, it's better not to happen. Once it does happen, it is a last resort, and as long as it does happen, it is best to avoid making the price too high at the beginning. And if the first person I meet is a strong person, it will be difficult to change the price when the price is set.

In this case, let's make an appointment with someone who is weaker first. I'll probably say that then. Do you know why I'm seeing you today? Shake your head? Just shake your head. Because, I didn't implement the reminder to you, you don't know. All right. Let's get started now. If you had known in advance, I'd have bothered you.

Listen up. The reason I'm meeting you is because of your salary. You should know how much your salary hasn't been set yet, right? Then you can set a price now. What's wrong? Why don't you speak? Won't you make an offer? Or will you make an offer, just say you don't dare to make an offer?

All right. If you're the former, then I can make a price for you. But, then again, you're such a big person. I won't believe it. If you really won't make an offer, then what's the salary in your resume, right?

What price do you think I'm asking you to offer? It's your own price. That's the salary. After all, the past is the past, and the present is the present. In the past you would have made an offer, but now you won't, which is completely understandable, maybe you have had some accident or some irritation that has become not.

However, I don't think you have any of that on your resume. So, if that's the case, why do you have this or that thing, right? So, if you want to say that you won't make an offer, I can only understand that you don't dare to say it, right? Actually, it doesn't matter.

You'll admit it. I won't have any opinion of you just because you admit it, and I won't stop hiring you just because you admit it. After all, I'm already planning to hire you. It's just that there is a need to negotiate the salary now, so I asked you to come here.

You should know the people who are your contemporaries. I didn't have an appointment with that person. Do you know why? Because I like you more than he says. Because, I think he is too oily and smooth, not an honest person, but I am a boss who likes honest people very much.

Therefore, in any case, I don't want to be too close to him, my relationship with him will only maintain the relationship between superiors and subordinates, but when I see your resume and your appearance, I feel that our relationship can be one step closer, work is of course also important, but we should be friends.

That's why I'm looking for you. It's just that since we are going to be friends, we must also talk about money. If you don't talk about money, you're not a friend either. Although there is an old saying that talking about money hurts feelings, there is something different about me talking about money.

I'm talking to you about money in advance. Generally speaking, talking about money and hurting feelings refers to not talking about it in advance, but after the fact, that is, when the money is earned, everyone wants to divide the money, and if you talk about money at this time, it is easy to hurt your feelings. Therefore, I will talk to you about money before you work, and there will be no sequelae.

You don't have to be afraid of anything, just say it. As much as possible, as long as the price is reasonable enough, even if it is high, I will accept it. Don't worry, I'm not a stingy person, since I'm going to hire you, and I specially asked you to meet alone, do you think I'll give you a low price?

I would never allow it. I won't allow you to set a low price either. You should make a high price for my friendship. If you're going to put a low price, then I'll just think you're looking down on me. You know what I mean? The higher the price, the higher the higher, but as long as it doesn't exceed a certain amount.

Because, after all, you're just a newcomer who just came in. If you give a new person too much salary, other colleagues will gossip. All right. Go ahead. How much do you want a month. ”