一大手企業エリートサラリーマンが会社を搾取し、富裕層になるまで One major corporate elite salaryman exploits his company until he becomes wealthy.

都内大手企業に勤務し、会社に最小の労働力を提供し、最大の給料を得ています。会社に搾取されない賢い生き方、資産運用の参考としていただきたい。 I work for a major company in Tokyo, providing the least amount of labor to the company and earning the maximum salary. I would like to use this as a reference for a wise way of life an

What you should do to get results in a short time

I want you to achieve results in a short period of time because I want you to achieve your life goals,

I want you to live your own life and make a difference, I want you to be filled with smiles that come naturally

when you feel the happiness of the people who are truly important to you!

In the first place, why is it important to "achieve results in a short time"?　

Wouldn't it be better to take your time and improve your accuracy!

Salarymen are paid by the hour, so they won't be able to make overtime money.

You may have wondered why, so I will answer why.

There are two main reasons for this, and the first reason is

The first reason is that by "getting results in a short time," you will be able to reduce your "working hours,"

which is your life itself, and use them for something meaningful other than getting results in a short time.

This is because no one knows how much time you have left in your life.

If you are 30 years old now, you have only 438,290 hours, or 50 years, until you turn 80.


Time is precious, more precious than money, and there is no time that can be wasted, not even for a second.

If your "life goal" has little to do with work, then you should "get results in the shortest amount of time possible"

and use the rest of your time for something that is "valuable" to you in order to achieve your "life goal"

(although it is difficult to find a goal in the first place).

Even if your "life goal" has absolutely nothing to do with your job (if it's painful to do your job),

I don't recommend changing or quitting your job!　

Because a job, a company, is just an ATM in a bank.

Because in business, getting results in less time = better ROIC

The second reason why "getting results in less time" is so important is because T "getting results in a short time" is the very essence of productivity for business people.

ROIC: Return on Invested Capital　

The amount of time it takes for a businessperson to do the same (or better) work

they have been doing, in a shorter amount of time,

and to add more value.

So, if at all possible, refrain from changing jobs within your company or changing jobs.

This is because you will lose a lot of productivity due to unfamiliar work.

If your "life goals" have a lot to do with your job, then

You need to keep pursuing to keep growing in your work and to be able to achieve more in less time. I n order to make your life more fulfilling, it is important to "get more done in less time!

I believe that getting out of work in a short time and enjoying the after 5 days is the best part of being a salaryman.

What does it mean to "pursue high productivity"?

In business, "being able to achieve results in a short time" is the same as "improving productivity" = "pursuing high productivity".

However, the most important thing in "pursuing high productivity" today is to significantly increase results through innovation.

Dramatically increasing results through innovation

First of all, we need to understand the definition of "productivity" and that there are four main ways to improve productivity.

In your daily work, you may be told by your boss or others,

"Reduce overtime hours! "You need to be more productive! "Do what you can to increase your productivity!

I'm sure there are many people who are told, "Reduce overtime!


Most of the time, however, it is used in the sense of "(1) Make the input resources as small as possible through improvement" = "Reduce costs as much as possible".

(In Japan, it has a strong image of "improving the efficiency of factory operations" in the manufacturing industry.

However, "Improvement" and "Innovation" have completely different goals and methods to achieve them.

In the same way, "reducing the input of resources" and "increasing the results" have completely different goals and methods of realization.

"Focus on increasing productivity! "Be aware of productivity improvement! When someone says, "Be aware of improving productivity!

When someone says to you, "Be conscious of improving productivity," or "Try to increase productivity as much as you can," what do you want to achieve this time,

"Improvement" or "Innovation"?　Also, which is more desirable, to "reduce the input resources" or to "increase the results"?

In addition, which of the four categories of "productivity improvement" is desired? It is necessary to make it clear among the parties concerned.

Without this clarification, those who receive the words will act based on their own interpretation, and those who send the words

will not be able to achieve the expected results...

The companies that are achieving rapid growth overseas are focusing their attention on "(4) Innovation to significantly increase results.

In GAFA (so-called Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple), the companies that have changed the world,

as the saying goes, focus on their customers and overwhelmingly improve their customer value, i.e., (4) significantly increase results through innovation.

How should we "pursue high productivity"?

How should we "pursue high productivity"? The answer is

Focus on "keeping the customer satisfied".

The customer here is not just your BtoB or BtoC business partner or customer.

It also includes your boss and colleagues who ask you for work.

Focus on "keeping your customers happy.

We are living in the age of VUCA, where conditions are constantly changing,

the future is uncertain, complex, and problems are unprecedented.

Products and services have become commoditized

(i.e., there is an abundance of similar products and services),

and new products and services are being introduced one after another at an incredible speed.

Inevitably, both companies and individuals are required to "(4) Dramatically increase results through innovation.

Innovation is the process of changing old habits, systems, and practices.

An attempt to change old habits, systems, conditions, or ways of thinking. This includes the concept of Digital Transformation (DX), which is currently in vogue.

When you hear the word "innovation," you may immediately think of technological innovation (a product that becomes more powerful).

However, innovation is not limited to technology; it also encompasses a wide range of old habits, systems, conditions, ways of thinking, and even business models.

(Definition of DX)


It is possible to innovate without technological innovation (even if it does not result in superior performance).

To give you an example (cited in Harvard Business Review), have you ever heard of Kodak?

Yes, it is a company that used to have explosive sales of photographic film.

We can learn a lot from the failures of that company.

There is a simple explanation for Kodak's strategy: it was due to short-sightedness.

The theory is that they were so blinded by their former success that they completely missed the rise of digital technology.

However, this is not the case. Because the man who developed the prototype of the world's first digital camera in 1975 was Steve Sasson, an engineer at Kodak.

This prototype was about the size of a toaster and took 20 seconds to take a single picture. The picture quality was poor,

and to view the photos, the camera had to be connected to a TV via a complicated wire.

Nevertheless, it definitely had great potential as a disruptive technology.

To discover something and to do something with it are two very different things.

The next explanation is that Kodak did not invest in the technology it invented.

According to Sasson's own account in the New York Times, the response from management about the digital camera

he developed was, "It's interesting. But don't tell anyone about it.

Although this is a reasonable line, it is not entirely true. Rather, Kodak has since invested billions of dollars in the development of various types of digital cameras.

Doing something, and doing something right, are two very different things.

The next explanation is that Kodak made a mistake in how it invested in digital cameras.

The next explanation is that Kodak made a mistake in investing in digital cameras by trying to bring them closer to the performance of traditional film photography,

rather than focusing on the simplicity of digital, and thus diverged from the market.

Certainly, this criticism applies to the early products (such as the $20,000 DSC-100).

In the end, however, they embraced simplicity, established the technology to easily import photos from the camera to the PC,

and built a strong position in the market.

Some argue that all of the above theories are just empty theories, because the real disruptive change was the integration of cameras and cell phones.

People are no longer printing photos, they are posting them on social media and mobile apps.

Kodak has completely missed the boat on this change.

But this is also not quite true.

Back when Mark Zuckerberg hadn't even started writing code for Facebook, Kodak made a purchase that seemed to foresee the future:

it bought Ofoto, a photo-sharing site, in 2001.

This was a very close call. I wonder what would have happened if Kodak had really stayed true to its traditional tagline,

"Share your memories, share your life.

Maybe they would have rebranded Ophotos as "Kodak Moments" (actually, they called it "EasyShare Gallery").

He could have pioneered a new field that could be called "life networking," where people could share photos, updates,

and links to news and information. Maybe.

Unfortunately, in the real world, Kodak used OPhoto to get more people to print digital photos.

Then, in April 2012, it sold the site to Shutterfly for less than $25 million as part of its bankruptcy resolution. Facebook, on the other hand,

paid a generous $1 billion that same month to acquire Instagram, a 13-employee company co-founded by Kevin Systrom in October 2010.

There were other ways for Kodak to revitalize itself after its core business was destroyed by digitization.  

The right lessons to take from Kodak are not so obvious. Companies are often aware of disruptive factors that affect their industry.

They also frequently allocate sufficient resources to enter new markets. Instead, the epitome of failure is the inability to fully embrace the new business models

that disruptive change makes possible.

Kodak developed the digital camera. It also invested in digital technology. It even foresaw that photos would be shared online.

So what was the company's mistake?

They failed to realize that online photo sharing was a new business in itself, not a way to expand their printing business.

The most important thing in this case was to focus on "keeping the customer satisfied to the highest degree.

The most important thing in this case is to focus on "keeping the customer satisfied" and to "keep the customer satisfied" through trial and error.

By all means, pursue "high productivity" = "(4) significantly increase results through innovation", and you will be able to achieve results in a short time!