论文部分内容阅读
有位同事对笔者说.实行局长负责制就好了,有事.自己就能作主了.再不用左问右商量了。这位同事的话,有对的面,这就是在“集体领导”时.事无大小都要会上讨论.不是议而不决,就是决而不行,局长的作用确实很难发挥。实行局长负责制.就是要克服这一弊端.突出局长在企业中的中心地位.起中心作用.该断则断。欠妥的(?)面是.不能把“作主”与“商量”完全对立起来,如果把群众监督、民主管理置之度外,那就有可能一人独断专行了。“决断”与“独断”.有本质的不同。“决断”是在集思广益的基础上.适时地作出正确的判断和决定。在国外.资本家为了不失误.不惜重金聘用咨询顾向。
One of my colleagues said to the writer that the implementation of the Secretary’s responsibility system is fine and that there are things. He can be the master of himself. No need to consult with the left. This colleague’s words have the right side. This is when “collective leadership” is discussed. There is no matter the size or the size of the meeting. There is no negotiation or indecision, that is, no decision. It is indeed difficult for the Secretary to play its role. The implementation of the chief responsibility system is to overcome this shortcoming. It highlights the central position of the director in the enterprise and plays a central role. What is wrong with the fact is that it is impossible to completely equate the “master” with “consultation.” If the supervision of the masses and the management of democracy are excluded, it is possible that one person will act arbitrarily. “Decision” and “Arbitration” are essentially different. “Decisions” are based on collective wisdom, timely making correct judgments and decisions. In foreign countries, capitalists do not hesitate to make mistakes. They don’t hesitate to hire consultants.