I believe that managers, especially in small companies, shouldn't treat everyone the same or apply a one-size-fits-all approach. To retain talent in small and medium-sized companies, some differentiation is necessary to attract and keep good people. Compared to large corporations, small companies can offer employees much more flexibility. Besides, employee contributions are inherently unequal, so how can treating them identically be fair? Creating small distinctions is actually fairer to those who have a proven track record and consistently perform well.

Therefore, when designing policies, there can be differences in the number of work-from-home days, opportunities to be on the interview panel, and other special perks.

But newer members will inevitably be confused about why certain benefits or treatments are exclusive to senior members. I always explain it again: It might seem a bit unfair to newcomers, but I have to consider team balance, so things won't be perfectly equal. This is because contributions and levels of trust differ, leading to different treatment. These extra benefits must be earned by proving yourself over time. When you perform as excellently as the senior members, you will naturally receive them.

Of course, if an employee's performance is outstanding, meeting the requirements for work quality and efficiency, and they genuinely need more support, a small to medium-sized company, in particular, is better positioned to discuss and grant extra flexibility.

Perhaps this is just my management style, but it's something I deeply believe in: the more mature and self-disciplined a professional is, the more trust they earn, and consequently, the more freedom they are granted.