There are often complaints from ordinary staff that there are contradictions between big leaders and small leaders, which makes it hard for subordinates to get caught in the middle. In fact, most of the time, the subordinates think more. In case of disagreement between the two leaders, they are preconceived that they are in conflict. Its hard for subordinates to deal with it. You really want more, and you are just cannon fodder more often.
What is the nature of the disagreement between the first leader and the deputy? Is it just a matter of different work, different ways and different styles, or an essential contradiction of competing for power and profit, competing for life and death and conflicting instructions?
In the face of differences in work, style and way, as subordinates, those with high EQ should try to communicate and coordinate, and try to unify their opinions to the essence of work. Both leaders are smart people, and its tasteless to take one subordinates as a vent.
If you dont have enough EQ, dont poke and tease things. Follow the working procedure, and you wont make a big mistake at any time. Its good that subordinates have the ability to reconcile the conflicts between superiors. Without this ability, remember that its forbidden to enlarge the conflicts between superiors. At least dont say that there are conflicts between the two leaders everywhere.
If there is an essential contradiction between the two leaders, as subordinates, firmly stand on the position of the companys fundamental interests, rules and regulations. Whoever has the right position will listen to it. No matter what happens, at least you wont make a big mistake. Its a big deal. If you feel wronged for a while, you wont be taken to the ditch.
There are different principles to deal with this contradiction. For example, a soldier should listen to the leaders command. If the company commander instructs him to do something, he will command at a higher level. When I was a soldier, the monitor asked me to buy vegetables, and the company commander asked me to drive him. Ill stand up and salute you. Im sorry. Please let the monitor give you an order. I was so angry that the company commander kicked me.
Later, when the squad leader left, the company commander asked me to be the squad leader and said that he would accept the principle of obeying the command. Very simply, I am not subject to the people, is the management level, who leads me, I listen to who. Its not right for a leader to overstep his command. If I listen to the company commander, what does the company commander think? This boy is not reliable.
At the bottom of the workplace, you are the lowest level staff. The relationship between small leaders and big leaders is not good. You can just listen to those who are in charge of small leaders. Why? Loyalty and execution are the most important factors when the superior observes the employees at the bottom. Youre just a clerk. What team are you on? You cant decide the pattern. The contradiction of superiors is nothing more than a little skirmish.
In the high-level workplace, you are a chess piece in the big pattern. This chess piece doesnt come from anyone who wants to. I have to be a little determined. Its a kind of life cultivation. Otherwise, how can you do steadily in the future? In the face of the high-level, who is in charge and who do you listen to. Because according to the law of heaven, your little leader in charge should also listen to the leader. How about you?
 inside and outside the system.
In the system, deputies are subordinate to the principal and subordinates to the superiors. This is an organizational act, not an individual act. Even if the Deputy despises the first leader, he must obey the first leader according to organizational procedures and discipline. This has nothing to do with relationships and charisma, but with serious organizational discipline.
The first leader is the monitor of the group. The monitor respects the opinions of the deputy, and the deputy should obey the leadership of the principal. There is a conflict between the deputy and the principal. If the superior intervenes, the deputy will probably be transferred. If the organization doesnt maintain the main post selected by itself, isnt it going to slap itself in the face?
Outside the system, there are many situations in the fight between the principal and the deputy, such as the interest game between shareholders, the relationship game in the family business, the fight between professional managers and landlords, and the fight between airborne soldiers and landlords.
If there is a big boss, you should listen to the overall interests of the company. Whose opinion represents the interests of the company, you will listen to whose opinion, as the saying goes, always stand on the side of justice. If you come to a big boss, the principle of dealing with big boss is to safeguard your own interests. Whoever damages the interests of the big boss will have to be reborn.
 emotional intelligence.
If you have a deep city and a high EQ, try to reconcile the contradiction between them and play the role of blending agent and lubricant, your management ability can also be greatly improved.
If you dont think you have such a good EQ, dont manage your boss on your own. Whose are you listening to? Those who listen to the rules and regulations should follow the rules and regulations and procedures.
An iron camp with running water. Your boss is often mobile, but the rules and regulations are long-term, short-term self-protection, long-term prospects. Even if you suffer a bit of grievance for the time being, its better to take advantage of small losses sooner or later. A just leader is someone who appreciates the principle at a critical time.