Under the leadership of the company’s past management team,

the overall operation was relatively stable. The company operated under a typical family-style management model.

Under the previous management system, the company environment was relatively stable, and this was once the company’s greatest asset.

The company is fundamentally operated under a highly family-centric management model.

During the tenure of the previous general manager, although many organizational members were relatives, the company had relatively stable leadership and business policies.

However, as power was transferred to the current management team, the organization experienced a significant leadership gap.

Management authority is highly concentrated among core family members, and there is no governance structure involving professional managers.

Decision-making transparency is low, and the involvement of multiple family members in management has resulted in unclear roles and responsibilities.

The phenomenon of “everyone being able to give orders” makes internal communication extremely costly.

Employees frequently face conflicting instructions.

The current management team adopts a highly oppressive and micromanaging approach.

It creates a high-pressure work atmosphere by installing monitoring equipment extensively and introducing real-time remote supervision.

The management team lacks professionalism in its communication style and has weak emotional control, which can easily trigger a crisis of trust between employees and supervisors.

As large numbers of experienced senior employees have left, the transfer of organizational knowledge has nearly come to a halt.

The promotion and retention mechanisms for new employees appear to be heavily tied to family connections and nepotism.

As a result, general job seekers lack career prospects and fair opportunities for advancement.

The company’s compensation structure lacks market competitiveness, and its benefits system is largely nominal.

Salary levels are low, and as business strategies have been adjusted, year-end performance bonuses have even effectively declined.

There is a serious gap between the recruitment page and actual implementation.

For example, items such as perfect-attendance bonuses, work bonuses, and activity bonuses are often not provided in practice.

The company lacks the necessary group employee insurance and accident insurance coverage.

Employee rights and interests are afforded extremely little protection.

“Employee dinners” are often limited to extensions of the family’s internal gatherings, making it difficult for ordinary employees to integrate and causing team cohesion to disappear entirely.

The company is currently in a period of adjustment involving a transformation of its business strategy and internal management conflicts.

Because the management team lacks an understanding of modern corporate governance

and has extended the family-style, patriarchal system into excessive monitoring of employees,

the workplace is characterized by high pressure, low benefits, a lack of professional respect, and limited opportunities for development.