Colleagues are easy to get along with, the manager treats people kindly, and the leave policy is very employee-friendly.
I’m not sure about now, but previously the general manager liked to interfere excessively in subordinates’ work. After making a mess of things from an unprofessional perspective, they would then blame the colleagues responsible and ask why the work had not been done properly. When intervening, they often made sarcastic remarks without leading by example, constantly lecturing subordinates on the grounds that they worked very hard and were busy, and telling team members to keep up with their progress and prepare early. Yet they themselves would always take on too many tasks, delay them until the last minute or even past the deadline, causing everyone tremendous anxiety without receiving any consideration. In the end, they would turn around and blame the colleagues responsible for not handling things properly, while again telling team members to keep up with their progress and prepare early—an endless cycle.
There is no one in upper management who understands management, and allowing the general manager to manage recklessly is itself a problem. For a small company, it is reasonable to handle 100 tasks and require each one to score 80 points, but taking on 1,000 tasks and still demanding 80 points for every one, then bringing them up one by one to blame subordinates for failing to achieve 80 points on such “simple” tasks, will only make everyone increasingly unhappy with their work. The fact that a 25-person company once had more than 10 people leave in a single year is no coincidence.
none
The result of applying for a position on 104 says that there are currently no positions matching your qualifications?
Are you trying to fool people?
Wouldn't it be better to just say directly that my abilities don't match the requirements?