So demand and supply do not match. In the end, you will only end up blaming your own team for being incompetent. In fact, there is still a problem most people do not know both this and that, just like looking for a husband. Our needs cannot be met by one person, but by several people. Therefore, it is said that the talents are not enough for the organization to make up. Often both parties suffer because they don't see clearly that the other party is actually not perfect, so knowing and employing people is not only in the workplace, it is needed every day. Only after seeing the other party's long version and shortcomings, can you know how to set expectations and how to use other talents to make up for the shortcomings.
I've been thinking about the difference between founders, CEOs, and COOs recently. The founder is the spiritual pillar, the core of the brand, the source of culture, and the Dinghaishenzhen under the risk. Founders need to have a consistent pursuit and shape it into a mission, vision, and values, which are often imaginative. The CEO is the planner of strategic decision-making and rhythm, who can put the founder's mission, vision, and values into strategic deployment, find people (mainly executives), find money (core resources, assets), and find direction landing to business models the ordinary product manager, and the team leader.
COO is the operator of the company and the first person responsible for revenue – expenditure = profit deploys the strategic rhythm to each business line/department, manages and supervises, effectively motivates, improves operational efficiency, increases revenue, reduces expenditure, and improves human efficiency, expand market share, etc. Of course, in most companies these three may be the same person. Sometimes it is necessary to give negative feedback to the other party at work, but I am worried that it will become a verbal attack/PUA to make the other party lose self-esteem, so what is the boundary/difference between language control/attack and give correct feedback.